DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS

The Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat is a vital
interface between global policies in the economic, social and environmental spheres, and
national action. The Department works in three main interlinked areas: (i) it compiles,
generates and analyses a wide range of economic, social and environmental data and
information on which Member States of the United Nations draw to review common
problems and to take stock of policy options; (ii) it facilitates the negotiations of Member
States in many intergovernmental bodies on joint courses of action to address ongoing or
emerging global challenges; and (iii) it advises interested governments on the ways and
means of translating policy frameworks developed in United Nations conferences and
summits into programmes at the country level and, through technical assistance, helps build
national capacities.

NOTE
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in the present publication do
not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the
United Nations concerning the legal status of any country or territory or of its authorities, or
concerning the delimitations of its frontiers. The term “country” as used in the text of this
review also refers, as appropriate, to territories or areas. The designations of country groups
in the text and the tables are intended solely for statistical or analytical convenience and do
not necessarily express a judgement about the stage reached by a particular country or area in
the development process.

Mention of the names of firms and commercial products does not imply the endorsement of
the United Nations.

ST/ESA/364
United Nations
Department of Economic and Social Affairs
http://www.un.org/disabilities
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The present document was prepared by the Secretariat for the Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities, Division for Social Policy and Development of the United Nations
Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), in close cooperation with the Essl
Foundation.

Case studies contributions were provided by experts and their affiliated organizations
from five regions of the world, especially the participants of the DESA and UN Habitat
Forum on Disability Inclusion and Accessible Urban Development, which took place in
Nairobi on 28-30 October 2015: Siam Imm Goh (Building and Construction Authority,
Singapore), Joseph Kwan (UDA Consultant Ltd., Hong Kong Special Administrative
Region, China), Steve Coe (Community Access Inc., Malaysia), Karen D. Schwartz and
Youn Young Park (Centre on Disability Studies, Canada), Isabel Cristina Pessoa Gimenes
(RIOinclui, Brazil), Guy Davies (Disability Solution, South Africa), Sunarman Sukamto
(CBR DTC Solo City, Indonesia), Janett Jimenez-Santos (Can Lah. S.C, Mexico), Annette M.
Williams (San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, United States of America),
Jane Wilbur (WaterAid, Ethiopia), Elizabeth Franchini (Fondazione Banca del Monte Di
Lucca, Italy), Michael Le Surf (Changing Places Consortium, United Kingdom), Gitte
Fyrkov (Musholm Vacation, Sports and Conference Centre, Denmark), Quemuel Arroyo
(New York City Department of Transportation, United States), Marnie Peters (Global
Alliance on Accessible Technologies and Environments, GAATES), Yana Chicherina
(Inclusive Employment and Social Partnership and Aziza Umarova, UNDP, Uzbekistan),
Balmas Silvia (European Foundation Centre, Belgium), Jutta Treviranus (Inclusive
Design Research Centre, Canada), Enrique Diego Bernardo (Empresa Municipal del
Transportes de Madrid, Spain), Agathe Bogacz (Forum EineMitte fur Alle, Hamburg,
Germany) and Or Cohen (Access Israel, Israel).

Valuable contributions, comments and inputs were also provided by Michael Fembek and his
team (Essl Foundation), Clinton E. Rapley (Associates for International Management,
Thailand and the United States) and Michael Szporluk (Independent Consultant on urban
development issues, United States).

The authors and collaborators wish to extend their appreciation for the support from Marnie
Peters (Global Alliance on Accessible Technologies and Environments, GAATES) and
Thomas Richert (Access Exchange International, United States) during the preparation of this
publication.

Team from the Secretariat for the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities,
Division of Social Policy and Development, Department of Economic and Social Affairs
of the United Nations (SCRPD/DSPD/DESA)
Akiko Ito, Guozhong Zhang, Maria Martinho, Robert Venne, Miranda Fajerman, Julie
Pewitt, Talin Avades and Claire Odom.
Table of Contents
I. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 6
Accessibility and inclusion of persons with disabilities in urban development ....................6
International policy frameworks requiring states to promote accessibility and disability
inclusive development .......................................................................................................................7
Initiatives and progress made to promote accessible and inclusive development ................8
The gains of accessibility .................................................................................................................9
Recommendations on the way forward to advancing an accessible and inclusive New
Urban Agenda for all .........................................................................................................................9
II. Criteria for selecting good practice case studies on promoting accessible urban
development that is inclusive of persons with disabilities ....................................................... 12
III. Case studies ...................................................................................................................... 15
Part One: Housing and built environments .................................................................................15
Case study 1: Accessibility Master Plan to create a user-friendly built environment
(Singapore) ........................................................................................................................................15
Case study 2: Accessibility and retrofitting to public premises (China, Hong Kong SAR)
19
Case study 3: Action plan towards Kuala Lumpur as an accessible city (Malaysia) .........22
Case study 4: Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities (United States of
America) .............................................................................................................................................26
Case study 5: Liveable and Inclusive Communities for Seniors with Disabilities and All
Citizens: Model and Tools for Actions (Canada) ......................................................................28
Case study 6: RIOinclui: Combining architecture, universal design and social work,
construction works for accessibility (Brazil) ..............................................................................30
Part Two: Transportation ................................................................................................................32
Case study 7: Inclusive Public Transportation (South Africa) ...............................................32
Case study 8: Accessibility standard for public transportation (Indonesia) .........................36
Case study 9: Accessibility for people with disabilities to the Bus Rapid Transit system
Metrobus (Mexico) ..........................................................................................................................38
Case study 10: Multi-Modal Transportation Accessibility in San Francisco (United
States)..................................................................................................................................................42
Case study 11: Visual and acoustic information on public buses (Spain) ............................49
Part 3: Public spaces and public services including information and communication
technology-based services ..............................................................................................................51
Case study 12: Including persons with disabilities in access to safe sanitation (Ethiopia)
51
Case study 13: Transforming an unused piece of land into an inclusive public space
(Mexico) .............................................................................................................................................54
Case study 14: City of Lucca – Becoming accessible (Italy) ..................................................58
Case study 15: Changing places (United Kingdom) .................................................................60
Case study 15: Accessible Musholm, a unique accessibility and universal designed
Vacation – Sports - Conference Centre for people with physical, cognitive and
communication disabilities (Denmark) ........................................................................................62
 Case study 16: Public Plaza: Inclusive Public Spaces (United States) .................................64
Part Four: Strategies and innovations for promoting accessible urban development ........66
Case study 18: Ecuador Lives Inclusion (Ecuador Vive la Inclusión) Technical Secretary
for the Inclusive Management on Disabilities of the Vice-Presidency of the Republic of
Ecuador (SETEDIS) ........................................................................................................................66
Case study 19: Supporting architects and urban planners to understand accessibility (The
Global Alliance on Accessible Technologies and Environments, GAATES) .....................72
Case study 20: Accessibility, civic consciousness, employment and social support for
people with disabilities (Uzbekistan) ...........................................................................................74
Case study 21: League of accessible and historical cities (Italy, Denmark, France, Spain,
Bulgaria) .............................................................................................................................................78
Case study 22: Aha! (Accessibility Help & Advice), Mapathon of accessible places and
inclusive customer service workshops (Canada) .......................................................................81
Case study 23: The Forum “One Quarter for All” (Germany) ...............................................83
Case study 24: Help me help you: accessibility of public services (Israel) .........................85
IV. Final words ....................................................................................................................... 87
Promoting accessibility as a public good, building sustainable and inclusive urban
development for all ..........................................................................................................................87
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to extend special appreciation to the many contributors, especially
those from the offices of UN-Habitat and the Secretary-General’s Special Envoy on
Disability and Accessibility, for their inputs received for this section.

Introduction
“Persons with disabilities have a significant positive impact on society,
and their contributions can be even greater if we remove barriers to
their participation. With more than one billion of persons with
disabilities in our world today, this is more important than ever.”

Ban Ki-Moon, United Nations Secretary-General, message on the

occasion of the International Day of Persons with Disabilities,
3 December 2012

By 2050, it is expected that about 6.25 billion people, 15 per cent of whom are persons with
disabilities, will be living in urban centres.1 Urbanization has the potential to be an engineer
for achieving sustainable and inclusive development for all. The current lack of
environmental accessibility2 faced by people with disabilities, in particular in many cities in
the world, presents a major challenge. As the international community prepares for the Third
Global Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III), which will
take place in Quito, Ecuador, in October 2016, it is an apt and a strategic opportunity to
promote an accessible and inclusive Urban Agenda.

In fulfilling the promise of a sustainable and inclusive New Urban Agenda, the work
of Habitat III would be greatly supported by promoting accessibility following universal
design approaches and disability inclusion. This requires strong commitments in concrete
terms including inclusive urban policy, regulatory norms and standards, universal design3
approach planning, allocation of necessary resources, and a broad-based partnership that
involves and engages all community members, including persons with disabilities.

Accessibility and inclusion of persons with disabilities in urban development

Urbanization is currently one of the most important global trends of the 21st century. Urban
environments, infrastructures, facilities and services, depending how they are planned and
built, can impede or enable access, participation and inclusion of members of society.

1
The World Urbanization Prospects (2014). United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
2
“Accessibility”, in this publication refers to a feature or quality of any physical or virtual environment, space, facility or
service that is capable of accommodating the needs of users of varying abilities or disabilities to understand, get access to or
interact with. Accessibility also refers to technical standards that are mandated nationally or internationally for the design
and construction of a physical or virtual environment, space, facility and service.
3
The European Union and 166 countries are currently States Parties to the CRPD. According to the Convention on the
Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Article 2, “Universal design” means the design of products, environments, programmes
and services to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design.
“Universal design” shall not exclude assistive devices for particular groups of persons with disabilities where this is needed.
 For the 15 per cent of the world’s population who live with a disability, many of
whom reside in urban areas, available evidence reveals a widespread lack of accessibility in
built environments, from roads and housing, to public buildings and spaces. Evidence also
reveals a lack of accessibility to basic urban services such as sanitation and water, health,
education, transportation, emergency and disaster response, resilience building, and access to
information and communications. These accessibility limitations greatly contribute to the
disadvantages and marginalization faced by persons with disabilities, leading to
disproportionate rates of poverty, deprivation and exclusion. These disadvantages also
impede the realization of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and other
internationally agreed development goals.

International policy frameworks requiring States to promote accessibility and disability

inclusive development

The current international policy framework guiding disability-inclusive urban development is

largely based on a number of instruments concerning persons with disabilities. The World
Programme of Action Concerning Disabled Persons (1982) (A/RES/37/52) views
accessibility as an essential means to further its goals of “full participation” and “equality”.
The Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunity for Persons with Disabilities (1994)
(A/RES/48/96) identifies “accessibility” of the physical environment and of information and
communication as two “target areas” to ensure equalization of opportunities. The Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006) further strengthened the international
normative framework for the advancement of the rights and the socio-economic development
of persons with disabilities. Accessibility is defined in the Convention as a cross-cutting issue
that enables persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects
of life. The Convention has a stand-alone article on Accessibility – Article 9 – and a number
of other provisions on detailed guidance on measures that States shall take to advance
accessibility. These include Article 19 on living independently and being included in the
community, Article 20 on personal mobility and Article 21 on freedom of expression and
access to information.

Under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, States Parties4 have
a general obligation: (i) “to undertake or promote research and development of universally
designed goods, services, equipment and facilities, as defined in Article 2 of the Convention,
which should require the minimum possible adaption and the least cost to meet the specific
needs of a person with disabilities, to promote their availability and use, and to promote
universal design in the development of standards and guidelines”;5and (ii) “to enable persons
with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects of life, States Parties
shall take appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis
with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and
communications, including information and communications technologies and systems, and
other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas.”6

In 2013, the United Nations High-level Meeting on Disability and Development and
its action-oriented Outcome Document (A/RES/68/3) stressed the importance of ensuring
4
As of 15 July 2016, there are 165 States and European Union party to the Convention.
5
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Article 4 – General obligations
6
Ibid., Article 9.
accessibility for and inclusion of persons with disabilities in all aspects of development, and
recommended giving due consideration to all persons with disabilities in the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development. The Outcome Document further called for actions to ensure
accessibility, following the universal design approach, by removing barriers to the physical
environment, transportation, employment, education, health, services, information and
assistive devices, such as Information and Communications Technology (ICTs), including in
remote or rural areas, to achieve the fullest potential throughout the whole life cycle of
persons with disabilities (A/RES/68/3).

The commitment of the international community to advance accessibility and to

mainstream disability in development was further strengthened and reflected in the recently
adopted 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Disability is specifically referenced in
seven targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the 2030 Agenda, including
SDG 11 related to sustainable cities and communities, with targets on providing accessible
transport systems and public spaces.7

Initiatives and progress made to promote accessible and inclusive development

Worldwide, in the recent years, there have emerged many promising initiatives and good
practices that have successfully promoted accessibility and the inclusion of persons with
disabilities, their rights, aspirations and contributions in the context of urban development.

The commitment of the United Nations to promoting accessibility, inclusion and

advancement of persons with disabilities in society and development is deeply rooted in its
Charter and the pursuit of promoting economic and social progress and human rights for all.
In 2013, the United Nations Secretary-General appointed as his Special Envoy on Disability
and Accessibility Excellency Lenin Moreno, who has attached great importance to the
promotion of accessibility and disability inclusion in development, including in the SDGs.8
United Nations system organizations are making progress in establishing internal policies
aimed at promoting built environments, facilities and services that are accessible and
inclusive for all.9

The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) and UN-Habitat
have been promoting accessibility and inclusion of persons with disabilities in contexts of
sustainable and inclusive development. DESA organized a series of expert group meetings on
accessibility in built environments (Washington D.C., 2010), on accessible ICTs, including in
the situation of disasters reduction (Tokyo, 2012; Sendai 2015) and on humanitarian response
actions (Istanbul, April 2016). Together with its Member States, United Nations entities and
other major stakeholders, DESA and UN-Habitat have also organized DESA Forums on
accessible and disability-inclusive urban development (New York, June 2016 and Nairobi
October 2015), published analytical research and guidance on accessibility and development,
and have facilitated and supported intergovernmental processes and bodies to advance
accessibility.

7
Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Available at
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/7891Transforming%20Our%20World.pdf
8
UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy on Disability and Accessibility, 8th session of the Opening Working Group of the
General Assembly on the Sustainable Development Goals, February 2014.
9
Secretary-General’s Bulletin on Employment and accessibility for staff members with disabilities in the United Nations
Secretariat (ST/SGB/2014/3).
The benefits of accessibility

Available evidence illustrates that urban infrastructures, facilities and services, if designed
and built following accessibility or inclusive “universal design” principles from the initial
stages of planning and design, bear almost no or only 1 per cent additional cost.10,11
Therefore, progressive realization of accessibility following universal design principles in
urban development is not beyond reach for low-income countries. Cities that depend on a
tourism economy are also likely to pay high opportunity costs for inaccessible infrastructure
and services if they exclude tourists with disabilities, and older persons and parents with
young children, who may experience accessibility limitations, who may otherwise visit these
destinations. It is estimated that, in economic terms,
that by not adapting its inaccessible infrastructures the tourism industry would fail to capture
approximately 15- 20 percent of the global market share.12

Basic economics posit that any barrier to participation – physical, technological, cultural or
institutional – effects efficient allocation of resources, organization of production, exchanges,
consumption, and distribution of benefits. This is of particular relevance in low-and middle-
income economies where limited available resources need to be allocated in a way that
maximizes utility and inclusion. Costs associated with the exclusion of a single group,
namely persons with disabilities, from the labour force could lead to substantial losses, for
example, of up to around 7 per cent of national GDP.13 The positive externality or spill-over
effect of accessibility on a broad spectrum of the population at large should therefore not be
overlooked.

For urban development to be sustainable and inclusive for all, it is essential for accessibility
to be given serious consideration and proactively promoted in the discourse related to the
upcoming Third United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Development-
(Habitat III) and its outcome New Urban Agenda. Accessibility is a matter of human rights,
and it is also an economic and social development imperative in the achievement of the SDGs
and other internationally agreed development goals.

Recommendations on the way forward to advancing the accessible and inclusive New
Urban Agenda for all

In October 2016, Habitat III will design the New Urban Agenda, which is expected to focus
on policies and strategies for effectively harnessing the power and forces behind
urbanization. The New Urban Agenda will provide the international community with a
distinct opportunity to transform current patterns of urbanization by fully incorporating
accessibility and disability inclusion in urban development policy and practices.

10
The World Bank (2008). Design for All: Implications for Bank Operations.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/DISABILITY/Resources/Universal_Design.pdf
11
Ratzka.Report of the CIB Expert Seminar on Building Non-Handicapping Environments (Budapest, 1991).
www.independentliving.org/cib/cibbudapest28.html.
12
The World Bank (2008). Design for All: Implications for Bank Operations.
13
Murray, B. (2012). Brief profile on people with disabilities. Employment for social justice and a Fair globalization paper.
International Labour Office, Geneva. www.ilo.org/employment/Whatwedo/Publications/WCMS_140958/lang--en/index.htm
With over 165 States parties who are already committed and obligated to advancing
accessibility,14 and with the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the
UN Habitat III and the New Urban Agenda present a historical opportunity to further
operationalize the SDGs, by promoting accessibility and the inclusion of persons with
disabilities in achieving inclusive and sustainable urbanization for all. A truly inclusive New
Urban Agenda also needs to actively include and engage persons with disabilities in its
discourse and development.

The following findings and recommendations, which were adopted at a United Nations expert
group meeting,15 may be helpful in informing the ongoing Habitat III discourses, developing
the New Urban Agenda and furthering accessible and inclusive urban development.

1. Promoting accessibility as a collective good and a key component in urban policy,

design, planning and development is critical to the success of the New Urban Agenda
 Accessibility shall be actively promoted as a collective good that benefits all.
Accessibility facilitates full and effective participation of all and should therefore
be incorporated and actively promoted as an integral component of good policy to
achieve inclusive and sustainable urban development. A city is only well designed
if is well designed for all.

 For the over one billion persons with disabilities worldwide, accessibility is a
precondition for their enjoyment of human rights and is a means for economic,
social, cultural and political empowerment, participation and inclusion.

 An accessible and disability-inclusive urban development agenda can be realized

everywhere. This requires strong commitments in concrete terms, which includes
inclusive and disability-responsive urban policy frameworks, appropriate
regulatory structures and standards, "design for all" approaches in planning and
design, and predictable resource allocations. It also requires active and meaningful
participation of persons with disabilities and their organizations, as rights-holders
and as agents and beneficiaries of development during all stages of the
urbanization process.

2. Accessible housing and built infrastructures as key elements for sustainable and
inclusive cities
 Integrated approaches to housing and the positioning of housing at the centre of
inclusive urban development need to take account not only of environmental
sustainability, diversity (including disability) and financial aspects, but also
human rights.

14
According to General Comment No. 2 that was issued by the Committee on the Rights of Persons with disabilities, States
parties have obligations, under the Convention, to adopt, promulgate and monitor national accessibility standards; to
establish minimum standards for the accessibility of different services provided by public and private enterprises for persons
with disabilities with different types of impairments; when reviewing their accessibility legislation, States Parties must
consider and where necessary amend laws to prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability and to consider their laws on
public procurement to ensure that their public procurement procedures incorporate accessibility requirements; States Parties
should also adopt action plans and strategies to identify exiting barriers to accessibility, set time frames with specific
deadlines and provide both the human and material resources necessary to remove the barriers, among others.
15
UNDESA/DSPD Forum: Disability Inclusion and Accessible Urban Development, Nairobi, 28-30 October 2015.
  Universal design, as a concept and principle, should be reflected in designs and
plans for new built environments and in renovations to buildings and facilities to
ensure they are accessible for all.

 Building standards, laws and effective enforcement mechanisms are essential to

ensure accessibility, availability, affordability and quality of housing and public
services for all, including persons with disabilities.

3. Accessible transportation, public spaces and public services

 Integrated transportation facilities and services not only provide accessibility for
all, but are also reliable and affordable. They drive sustainable and inclusive
growth and change.

 Inclusive transportation requires continuity of accessibility throughout travel

chains, meaning all elements of a journey from the starting point to the final
destination include accessible entranceways.

 Integrated urban policy and plans must identify and address gaps in accessibility
in public spaces and from one built environment to another.

 Social equity requires that the costs of accessible transportation and basic public
services shall not be borne fully by users who require services since these are
essential to ensure opportunities for full and effective participation in social,
economic, cultural and political life for persons with disabilities.

4. Accessible information and communication technologies (ICTs) for building

inclusive, resilient and smart cities and communities
 Governments should develop accessible ICTs, including mobile applications,
government websites, public kiosks and automated teller machines, and should
include accessible ICT services in their urban development plans.

 Due to the rapid pace of development and innovation in ICT products and
services, assistive and adaptive devices and technologies are not always
accessible, and the cost of many of these technologies limits access for persons
with disabilities, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. Governments
should promote and facilitate research, development and mainstreaming of
accessible ICT products and services by including accessibility requirements in
public procurement exercises for ICT products and services used by public
organizations or their customers or staff.

 Many national telecommunication authorities have universal service goals that

recognize affordability and access to networks as a right; consideration shall be
accorded urgently to accessibility as a third universal service goal.

5. Full and active participation of persons with disabilities and broad-based multi-
stakeholder partnerships for advancing inclusive and accessible urban development
 The message of the SDGs to “leave no one behind” seeks to ensure that the targets
are met for all peoples and segments of society, including persons with disabilities
in cities.
  Achievement of a truly inclusive New Urban Agenda, where no one is left behind,
requires a holistic and people-centred approach that informs, engages and involves
persons with disabilities and their organizations in all aspects of urban
development, in particular, access to adequate housing.

 The New Urban Agenda should further the advancement of accessibility for all
with respect to the right to adequate housing, the built environment, public spaces,
transportation, facilities, services and ICTs.

 A New Urban Agenda cannot be achieved unless it responds to the needs and rights of
everyone, including the estimated one billion people with disabilities.

Criteria for selecting good practice case studies on promoting accessible urban development
that is inclusive of persons with disabilities

“A city that is well designed is well designed for all. Accessibility, as a

collective good that benefits all, should therefore be considered a
central component of good policy to achieve inclusive and sustainable
urban development.”

Recommendations from a group of experts at the UNDESA-UN Habitat

Forum on Disability Inclusion and Accessible Urban Development,
Nairobi, 28-30 October 2015.

This document is prepared in response to the request in paragraph 15(b) of the

General Assembly Resolution 65/186, in which the Secretary-General was asked to “provide
information on best practices at international, regional, sub-regional and national levels for
including persons with disabilities in all aspects of development efforts”.

The document aims to: (i) use case studies from both developing and developed cities
and countries to illustrate what constitutes best practices in successfully promoting
accessibility and hence the inclusion of persons with disabilities in the urban development
contexts, in alignment with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(CRPD) and the most recent normative frameworks, in particular, the 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development; (ii) showcase key experiences and lessons learned from these case
studies, for informing and contributing to the ongoing discourses leading to the United
Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Human Settlements (Habitat III) and the
outcome of the Conference “New Urban Agenda” as well as its implementation; and (iii)
present specific recommendations and support initiatives and actions to advance inclusive
urban development for all.

The case studies included in this document have been collected through key contacts
and networks. In collecting these case studies, efforts were made to present good practices in
different geographical regions and diverse thematic areas, with an emphasis on areas
emanating from recent UN General Assembly resolutions highlighting the promotion of
accessibility in housing, built environment, information and communication technologies,
public spaces and public services, as well as relevant strategies including cooperation and
partnership with multi-stakeholders for the effective promotion of accessibility (A/RES/68/3).
This selection of case studies does not aim in any way to be exhaustive; it simply aims to
offer a set of illustrative examples.

The section below outlines a set of criteria for assessing good practices in successfully
promoting accessibility and inclusion of disability in the contexts of urban development.
Good practices are understood here as: (i) well-documented initiatives with evidence of
success in the creation of barrier-free environments, space, facility and services in different
sectors of urban development; and (ii) initiatives that can be considered for replication,
scaling up and further study.

The criteria for best practices listed below aim to provide a framework for assisting
initial assessments of existing practices and to facilitate further discussion. They reflect an
ideal situation: the case studies included here present experiences of working towards the best
practices criteria without necessarily meeting all of them. In addition, given the topic and
focus of the policy work and of the context, certain criteria will be more relevant to the scope
of the programme or project.

These initial criteria are based on, above all: (i) the CRPD; (ii) recently adopted
United Nations resolutions; (iii) General Comment No. 2 (accessibility) of the Committee on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; 16 (iv) the reports of the Expert Group on
Mainstreaming Disability in MDG Policies, Processes and Mechanisms: Development for
All; and (v) the gender mainstreaming experience. 17 Some of the criteria are closely
interlinked. For example, if participation is to be meaningful, it has to be accessible and non-
discriminatory. Moreover, some of the criteria may serve as a means to the end of
mainstreaming disability in a specific project or initiative, but they may also represent an end
in themselves.

To satisfy the criteria for best practice, the example must:

 promote accessibility in one or more urban sectors, such as built environment,

public space, transportation and information and communications, including ICTs,
and public services;

16
CRPD/C/GC/2. https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G14/033/13/PDF/G1403313.pdf?OpenElement
17 UNDESA. 2011. Best practices for including persons with disabilities in all aspects of development efforts; Australian
Agency for International Development. 2008. Development for All: Towards a disability-inclusive Australian aid program
2009-2014, Canberra, AusAID; European Disability Action for Mainstreaming Assessment Tool: A Practical Tool for
Effective Disability Mainstreaming in Policy and Practice, Leonard Cheshire International, 2006; Swedish International
Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). 2009. Human Rights for People with Disabilities: Sida’s plan for work; Lord,
Janet et al., 2010. CRPD and WHO. 2009. Disability and International Cooperation and Development: A Review of Policies
and Practices, World Bank; Mainstreaming Disability in MDG Policies, Processes and Mechanisms: Development for All,
report of the Expert Group Meeting, organized by the Secretariat for the CRPD, Division for Social Policy and
Development, DESA in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO), April 2009; NORAD. 2011. Evaluation
of Norwegian support to promote the rights of persons with disabilities, inception report, draft version, October 2011;
Priestley, M. 2009. Targeting and mainstreaming disability in the 2008-2010 National Strategy Reports for Social Protection
and Social Inclusion, University of Leeds; United Nations. 2010. UN Expert Group Meeting on Accessibility: Innovative
and cost-effective approaches for inclusive and accessible development, June 2010; UNNATI (Organisation for
Development Education). 2011. Realising UNCRPD: Learning from Inclusive Practices: Case Studies in Education and
Employment; Voluntary Service Overseas (VSO). 2006. A Handbook on Mainstreaming Disability.
 increase awareness and understanding of accessibility at the organizational,
community and institutional level;

 be results-oriented and produce a measurable change that contributes to the

creation or improvement of environmental accessibility in specific sectors that
impact on the quality of life of persons with disabilities. This also implies having
a robust monitoring and evaluation system that includes the collection of data;

 be appropriately resourced in terms of financial and human resources, hence, the

importance for donors to emphasize accessibility and disability-inclusive matters
and for NGOs to recognize it as a priority;

 be sustainable, socially, culturally, economically (i.e. be affordable), politically

and environmentally;

 be replicable, i.e. show how the product and/or process can be reproduced or
adapted in other countries and contexts. Replicability should be assessed taking
into consideration context-specificity, since it is important to recognize that some
practices in one country or context are not necessarily valid or transferable to the
circumstances of another. The concept of “appropriateness” (i.e. suitable to other
contexts) should therefore be introduced when talking about replication;

 involve effective partnerships that show the commitment of various organizations,

which may include, inter alia, government, academia, media, the United Nations
and NGOs. Inter-agency and inter-organizational efforts should be emphasized
with the full involvement of Disabled People’s Organizations (DPOs) and local
governments to assure ownership of the initiative.
Case studies

Part One: Housing and built environments

Case study 1: Accessibility Master Plan to create a user-friendly built environment

(Singapore)

Name of organization/Government entity: Building and Construction Authority (BCA)

Thematic area of good practice example: Raising the accessibility standards and drive the
adoption of universal design (UD) in the built environment.

Specific location: All places accessed by the public in Singapore.

Duration of project/programme: 10 years.

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Users and occupants of residential and public
buildings and parks and open spaces.

Implementing agency/agencies: BCA and other public agencies.

Source of funds: Government

Brief background to the project: Singapore, a city state with a current population of 5.54
million, underwent rapid urbanization from the late 1950s, resulting in a high-rise, high-
density built environment in the years that followed. At the early stage of nation building, the
provision of accessibility was not a critical concern compared to maximizing land resources
for the economic and housing needs of the growing population.

The issue of accessibility was discussed in the 1980s, which resulted in legislation to provide
barrier-free accessibility in buildings under the Building Control Regulations, 1989. While
the legislation has been an important lever in ensuring accessibility in new buildings, a large
stock of buildings built before the legislation was not barrier-free.

With a fast ageing population, planning for a user-friendly built environment was imperative.
The BCA Accessibility Master Plan was thus developed in 2006 to support and complement
the Recommendations by the Ministerial Committee on Ageing Issues and the Enabling
Master Plan to create an inclusive built environment.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The project pursues an upstream goal of

raising the accessibility standards and driving the adoption of Universal Design (UD) in the
built environment. Accessibility and UD are instrumental to continual efforts in building a
Liveable City for All Ages and in fulfilling our nation’s obligations under the United Nations
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: The Master Plan is a holistic

framework that addresses both accessibility and UD adoption in the built environment with a
multi-lever and multi-pronged approach to deal with accessibility concerns of the past,
present and future developments through Four Strategic Thrusts.
Initiatives implemented under the Four Strategic Thrusts include:

i) Removing existing barriers

a. a five-year Accessibility Upgrading Programme (2006-2011) to support the
upgrading of key buildings by the public and private sectors. A section of
Orchard Road was chosen as one key area for driving accessibility;
b. a capital incentive of 40 million Singaporean dollars of Accessibility Fund to
share the cost of construction of basic accessibility features implemented by
the private sector building owners.
ii) Tackling future challenges upstream
a. Raising the minimum standard of the Accessibility Code to benefit a wider
spectrum of people – persons with disabilities, older persons and young
children.
b. Promoting the adoption of UD
 published UD Guides;
 organized BCA UD Award (from 2006-2011) to recognize buildings
and stakeholders that adopt a user-centric philosophy in their design;
 To “brand” UD with the launch of the BCA Universal Design Mark
certification scheme in 2012.
iii) Maintaining Existing Accessible Features
a. To deal with misuse and removal of accessible features, the Building Control
Act was amended in 2008 to place a duty on the building owners to continue
to maintain the accessible features in their buildings.
iv) Raising awareness and capabilities of the industry and stakeholders
a. Outreach and education initiatives include:
 the Singapore Universal Design Week: a week-long programme of
conferences, forums, workshops and exhibitions;
 a one-stop information portal, www.friendlybuilding.sg;
 “Find your friendly building” Apps;
 training programmes for building professionals and students;
 continuous encouragement of building owners to upgrade with the
support of the Accessibility Fund.

Changes achieved: The project has led to progressive, observable improvements in

accessibility and wider application of UD principles in new and existing buildings
undergoing major alteration and additions.

 As of 2012, almost 100 per cent of government buildings frequented by the public
were barrier-free, an increase from about 50 per cent in 2007.
 More than 90 per cent of the buildings along Orchard Road now have at least basic
accessibility, an increase from 41 per cent in 2006.
 The BCA UD Mark Certification Scheme was recognized as an innovative project by
the “Zero Project” in 2014 in successfully encouraging building owners/developers to
voluntarily adopt UD.
How change was monitored and evaluated:
Key steps for monitoring and evaluating the Orchard Road project are:

i) Survey forms for building owners to carry out a self-check, followed up with a
site audit by BCA.
ii) Buildings are rated according to the level of accessibility and the ratings are
posted on the portal www.friendlybuilding.sg.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme:
i) Lack of a business justification
Building owners are not keen to voluntarily upgrade their buildings even with the
support of Accessibility Fund, citing the lack of a business case and the loss of
saleable/rentable floor areas.
ii) Land scarcity in Singapore
With high land cost, most developers are reluctant to go beyond Code compliance
to incorporate UD in their buildings.
iii) Floods
The need for higher platform levels to mitigate flash flood remains a challenge to
have barrier-free interconnectivity and entries into buildings.
Other lessons learned: To create an inclusive environment, the close 3-P (the public, the
private sector and people) collaboration is key in driving accessibility improvements and
broadening the UD. It is a whole-of-government effort through continual engagement with
the private sector and people.

Other improvements made to the built environment:

i) The Housing and Development Board retrofitted the public housing estates to
enhance accessibility, improved connectivity between building blocks, key
precinct facilities and amenities, and linked access routes to traffic crossings.
ii) The Land Transport Authority improved the accessibility of train stations and
road- related infrastructures in preparation for all public buses and services to be
wheel-accessible by 2020.

Contact:
Ms. GOH Siam Imm
Building and Construction Authority
52 Jurong Gateway Road #10-01 - Singapore 608550
GOH_Siam_Imm@bca.gov.sg
www.bca.gov.sg
www.bca.gov.sg/friendlybuilding
Case study 2: Accessibility and retrofitting to public premises (China, Hong Kong SAR)

Name of organization/Government entity: Labour and Welfare Bureau, The Government

of the China, Hong Kong SAR

Thematic area of good practice example: To retrofit existing government buildings and
facilities to be user-friendly and accessible for all, including people with disabilities

Initiative selected as good practice example: The 2010 Report of the Equal Opportunities
Commission Hong Kong (EOC) made recommendations on the improvement of accessibility,
connectivity and interface with surrounding environment and user-friendly management
practices for publicly accessible premises.

Specific location: The 18 districts of the city of Hong Kong

Duration of project/programme: 2011 – 2017

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Users and occupants of public buildings, facilities,
parks and open spaces including people with disabilities, the elderly and the community at
large

Implementing agency/agencies: The works departments of the Hong Kong SAR

Government including the Architectural Services Department (ArchSD), the Highways
Department (HyD) and the Civil Engineering and Development Department, in collaboration
with the managing departments of these premises and facilities.

Source of funds: Hong Kong SAR Government

Brief background to the project: In response to the Equal Opportunities Commission

(EOC) Report, the Government set up a Task Force to examine not only the government and
its Housing Authority (HA) premises identified by EOC, but also around 3,900 premises and
facilities under the management of the Government departments and HA that have a frequent
public interface. The people responsible for the premises responded promptly and followed
up on the recommendations of removing the physical barriers and providing access to these
premises for people with disabilities.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: It is the Government’s established policy

objective to provide a barrier-free environment for persons with disabilities with a view to
enabling them to gain access to public and private premises and make use of the facilities on
an equal basis with others, thereby facilitating them to live independently and integrate into
society.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: For the retrofitting programme

devised by HA to improve accessibility of 235 premises/facilities under its management,
which covers public housing estates, commercial centres, carparks and factory buildings,
most of the improvement works were implemented by 30 June 2012. To strike a balance
between the progress of improvement works, service interruption and nuisances to tenants,
HA had scheduled some of the improvement works for completion by 30 June 2014. To tie in
with HA’s lift/elevator modernization programme, a small proportion of the improvement
works will be completed by 2016-2017. In brief, site preparations for all premises/facilities
have been completed, while works have commenced at 185 premises/facilities.

In addition, HyD continues to accelerate its retrofitting programme for the provision
of barrier-free access (lift or ramp) at public footbridges, subways or elevated walkway
structures that do not have such access or alternative at-grade crossings, where technically
feasible. Up to now, out of a total of 295 such facilities, HyD has completed investigation of
123 facilities, of which 67 were found feasible for lift/ramp retrofitting works. Among these
67 facilities, the retrofitting works for 25 have already been completed, and the retrofitting
works for nine others are in progress or under active planning.

As regards the remaining footbridges, subways and elevated walkway structures, HyD
has already commenced planning and investigation for retrofitting works. In order to further
shorten the time of project delivery, retrofitting works for all remaining feasible items will be
taken forward in phases with the majority of works scheduled for completion by around
2016-2017 and the rest (e.g. those involving public objections or which are technically
complex) by around 2017-2018.

The Administration has already obtained funding approval of about HK$292 million
(US$38 million) from the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council for the design of
barrier-free facilities at about 180 public pedestrian footbridges and subways, as well as the
first phase of retrofitting works (involving ten facilities). For the remaining retrofitting works,
the Administration intends to seek funding from the Legislative Council in several batches as
soon as the design works have been completed.

Changes achieved: The major access retrofitting and improvement programme covers about
3,700 government premises and facilities.

How change was monitored and evaluated: The Government of the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region worked closely with EOC, the Rehabilitation Advisory Committee,
the rehabilitation sector and the community in building towards a barrier-free and inclusive
society. Since April 2011, the Government has undertaken to provide, a quarterly progress
report of the retrofitting programme for upgrading the barrier-free facilities in existing
Government and HA premises and facilities.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: Professional and Qualified Access Consultants should be engaged, at
the outset of any programmes and working with the disabled community, to provide advice
on the design and implementation of the programme.

Other lessons learned: There is need to train Access Coordinators and Access Officers.

To dovetail with the appointment of Access Coordinators (ACs) and Access Officers (AOs)
in Government bureaux and departments in April 2011, the Government has launched a series
of training, including seminars and pilot workshops, in collaboration with EOC for ACs and
AOs since early 2011.

A web-based training package and new training video clips produced in collaboration
with EOC have also been uploaded onto the government network to further enhance the
awareness of accessibility in the civil service. Also, departments that have frequent interface
with the public in their service delivery (such as the Hong Kong Post, the Transport
Department, the Hong Kong Police Force, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department,
the Housing Department, and the Leisure and Cultural Services Department) continue to
organize, in collaboration with the EOC and the Civil Service Training and Development
Institute (CSTDI), tailored-made accessibility seminars/workshops for their frontline staff.

Furthermore, the Labour and Welfare Bureau and CSTDI, in collaboration with the
Hong Kong Council of Social Service, organized the first series of sign language training
workshops for frontline staff of government departments in August 2011. The training aims
to enhance their knowledge in basic sign language and awareness of the deaf culture, thereby
facilitating the hearing impaired in their access to government services. Another round of
workshops was rolled out in February 2012.

Contact:
Ar. Joseph Kwan MH
UDA Consultants Ltd.
Consultants in Universal Design & Accessibility
China, Hong Kong SAR
jkuda@netvigator.com
Case study 3: Action plan towards Kuala Lumpur as accessible city (Malaysia)

Name of organization/Government entity: Project Implementation and Building

Maintenance Department

Thematic area of good practice example: Built environment

Specific location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Duration of project/programme: 2010

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Primarily persons with disabilities and the elderly

Implementing agency/agencies: Project Implementation and Building Maintenance

Department

Source of funds: Kuala Lumpur City Hall and Federal Government

Brief background to the project: Kuala Lumpur’s Uniform Building By-law contains an
obligation to respect accessibility standards. These standards apply to the access to public
buildings, the access to outdoor spaces, escape routes and minimum design criteria for public
toilets. In 2002, under the Biwako Millennium Framework: Towards an Inclusive, Barrier-
free and Rights-based Society for Persons with Disabilities in Asia and the Pacific, the
Malaysian government committed to achieve a 75 per cent barrier-free environment by 2012.
In 2008, the country enacted the Persons with Disabilities Act, which contains accessibility
provisions and a definition of Universal Design. In 2010, the city developed the Action Plan
Towards Kuala Lumpur as Accessible City. Subsequently, in 2012, access to the physical
environment, public transportation, knowledge, information and communication became goal
number three of the Incheon Strategy to “Make the Right Real” for Persons with Disabilities
in Asia and the Pacific.

In November 2012, Malaysia, together with other Member States of United Nations
Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), adopted the Ministerial
Declaration on the Asian and Pacific Decade of Persons with Disabilities, 2013-2022 and the
Incheon Strategy to Make the Rights Real for Persons with Disabilities in Asia and Pacific.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The Action Plan towards Kuala Lumpur as
Accessible City, which was developed in 2010, sets out an implementation framework
including workshops, access auditing and a holistic focus on all three stages of the
construction process: design, construction and post construction. It highlights three priority
areas: legislation, enforcement and monitoring, and awareness raising. The core concepts are
the continuum of access, approachability, accessibility and usability by applying Universal
Design.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: All new developments in Kuala

Lumpur are controlled under the issuance of Development Order (D.O.). Conditions applied
in D.O. require that all developments comply to MS 1184 (2014) and MS 1183. In addition,
all the Submitting Principal Persons (SPPs) are required to sign an undertaking as follows: "...
I certify that all the accommodations to be constructed/provided are in compliance with
Malaysian Standard 1183, 1184 and Disability Act 2008. I accept full responsibility
accordingly."
Implementation is also supported by:

 Monitoring: During the construction, access auditors inspect the construction and
have the possibility to issue a stop-work order. After the construction, follow-up
inspections are carried out.

 Enforcement: Enforcement mechanisms comprise Access Officers, the Access

Advisory Group, Access Inspectors, and Access Auditors. Access statements,
inspections and audits are used to monitor and enforce accessibility standards.

 Awareness raising and training: Awareness-raising programmes create a constant

dialogue, and offer workshops for professionals and pilot projects as benchmarking.

Changes achieved:

 A benchmark was created for all local authorities in Malaysia.

 BCA was the first local authority implement the Access Statement for Accessibility in
public projects

 More than 100 access audits were carried out and nine training workshops held (3
times annually).

 2,241 persons with disabilities (as of 31 December 2015) staying in Kuala Lumpur
City Hall adapted public housing units.

 The pedestrian network, which consists of a 48.9 km long pedestrian walkway in the
city of Kuala Lumpur, was upgraded in 2011-2014.

 More than 1 per cent of Kuala Lumpur City Hall’s employees are persons with
disabilities.

 This initiative was highlighted in the newsletter of Access Exchange International.

 Access audit manual and guidelines were published.

 The Mayor’s Award was received for good practices.

 Collaborations were established with various agencies and universities in research

studies and projects.
How change was monitored and evaluated: In 2010, Kuala Lumpur City Hall created a
special Innovation and Building Standard Unit, which serves as a secretariat to set up
guidelines, design methods of access, run courses, conduct access audits and perform
upgrades, as well as enter into dialogue with persons with disabilities. It set up four
enforcement mechanisms: Access Officers, the Access Advisory Group, 27 Access Inspectors
and 27 Access Auditors (figures as of 2013). All audits are conducted with persons with
disabilities. Awareness and training programmes on access audits are continuously carried
out. Retrofitting and upgrading in renovation are encouraged, stakeholder dialogues are held,
and pilot projects are carried out.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: Retrofitting projects and historical buildings will be a challenging task
due to the constraint of sites and the complexity of the urban city of Kuala Lumpur.

Other lessons learned: Currently, Kuala Lumpur City Hall (KLCH) staff are working with
the national standard-setting body. In 2013, the guidelines Using Universal Design in the
Built Environment (MS 1184:2014) were published for public comment and were enforced in
2014. Thus, it became mandatory for all public and private service providers. KLCH plans to
undertake a Barrier-Free City Master Plan, accessible tourism and a comprehensive
accessibility mapping.

Contact:
Ch'ngGaik Bee @ Hjh.Dalilah Bee Abdullah
Deputy Director
Project Implementation and Building Maintenance Department
Kuala Lumpur City Hall
24 Floor, Menara DBKL 3, Bandar Wawasan,
Jalan Raja Abdullah, 50300 Kuala Lumpur.
Tel: +603 26176522 Fax: +603 26983854
cgb4444@yahoo.com.sg
0060-19-3298169
http://bengkeloku.webs.com
Case study 4: Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities (United States of America)

Name of project implementation: Community Access, Inc.

Thematic area of good practice example: Housing and Infrastructure

Specific location: New York, United States of America

Duration of project/programme: 1980 to present

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Persons living with mental illness, HIV/AIDS and
addiction issues, who are often poor. Most have undergone years of hospitalization,
homelessness and incarceration, and have experienced trauma in their lives.

Implementing agency/agencies: Community Access, Inc.

Source of funds: In the United States, federal, state and city funds and corporate equity
investments finance the development of the housing. Government grants subsidize the rents,
allowing tenants to pay only one-third of their income in rent. Government grants,
foundations, and private philanthropy fund the support services.

Brief background to the project: Beginning in the 1980s, homelessness increased

dramatically in New York and other major cities in the United States as patients were
released from psychiatric hospitals without the services necessary to live in the community.
Many of these patients ended up on the streets and in shelters, which created a major public
health problem with significant costs to the public.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: Supportive housing is the evidence-based

solution to homelessness and the institutionalization for persons with disabilities. By
combining affordable rental housing with on-site professional and peer supports, people are
able to live independently and become active participants in the community.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: Community Access develops

affordable rental housing to help persons with mental illness live independently. With the
help of support services in the buildings, formerly homeless people have a place to call home
and are able to become active, and often employed, citizens. Community Access pioneered
the housing model of integrating persons with psychiatric disabilities in low-income families,
which has become the supportive housing model of the New York State Office of Mental
Health and has been replicated throughout the nation. Other populations, including persons
with HIV/AIDS, seniors, homeless families, veterans, and youth aging out of foster care have
benefitted from supportive housing.

Changes achieved: No longer is homelessness managed solely through emergency services;

it is now addressed through affordable housing with supportive services. State and federal
budgets reflect a shift in investments from transitional shelters to supportive housing. The
design of the supportive housing has also become more sustainable, active and energy-
efficient.
How change was monitored and evaluated: Extensive evaluation through independent
academic studies (e.g. University of Pennsylvania) and by the US Federal Government. Key
results are better quality of life and cost savings to public systems.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: It is challenging to find the political will to address poverty issues as
well as build affordable housing in high-cost cities. There is a stigma around mental illness,
which creates resistance in many neighbourhoods.

Other lessons learned: Supportive housing reduces homelessness for people with disabilities
and helps them reconnect with community and family. It has resulted in cost savings across
public health and social services systems. Studies show that hospital emergency room visits,
emergency detoxification services and incarceration rates have significantly declined.
Supportive housing has been incorporated in all 50 states in the United States, and has been
embraced by Australia and Canada.

Contact:
Mr. Steve Coe, CEO
scoe@communityaccess.org
Community Access Inc.
www.communityaccess.org
Case study 5: Liveable and Inclusive Communities for Seniors with Disabilities and All
Citizens: Model and Tools for Actions (Canada)

Thematic area of the good practice example: Knowledge sharing, partnership building,
community inclusion, ageing and disability

Specific location: Canada – British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario

Duration of the project: January 2010 – March 2012

Implementing agency/agencies: Canadian Centre on Disability Studies

Source of funds: Human Resource and Skills Development Canada (Office for Disability
Issues)

Brief background to the project/programme: Since 2005, the Canadian Centre on

Disability Studies (CCDS) has conducted a series of projects focusing on ageing and
disability. Statistics have shown that as people age, they often age into disability, even if they
did not identify as being someone with a disability when they were younger.

People with disabilities are living longer, and many now reach the age of seniors.
Despite some common interests between these two population groups, the seniors’
community and the disability community, current policies and programmes for them are often
planned and implemented in an isolated way, leading to the duplication of services and/or
limiting benefits to a narrow range of community members (“siloed” thinking and planning).
To address these concerns, CCDS has developed and continues to refine the Liveable and
Inclusive Community (LIC) Concept Model and accompanying Planning and Evaluation
Frameworks. The Model and Frameworks have been designed to help policy developers,
project/programme planners and community members plan new initiatives and evaluate
existing initiatives, with the ultimate goal of creating communities that are both liveable and
inclusive.

Overall objectives of the project/programme and of the selected practice: Using the
knowledge and experience of community participants, the overall objective is to increase the
knowledge of policymakers, service providers and the community generally on how to create
LICs; develop Planning and Evaluation Frameworks based on the LIC Concept Model that
can be shared by the community and government, and applied to ensure better activity
coordination, decision-making and distribution of resources for all community members,
including people with disabilities; and provide guidelines for planning/evaluating initiatives
(policies, practices and/or programmes) that lead to LICs.

Process/strategy used to implement the project/programme:

 Workshops are conducted in each region to encourage community participants to

identify strategies and barriers to planning initiatives that contribute to LICs.
Workshop participants are recruited by regional coordinators who have knowledge of
their communities. They are drawn from both the seniors’ community and the
disability community, planners and government representatives.
  With the involvement of government and community participants across Canada, the
LIC Concept Model is being refined, and the Planning and Evaluation Frameworks
are being developed.

 Government and community participant groups select an initiative of their choice and
use the LIC Concept Model and Frameworks to plan for or evaluate that initiative.

Changes achieved: This project resulted in the increased capacity of government and
community participants to: plan future initiatives that are inclusive (e.g. accessible housing,
increasing accessibility of community public and private space); and to evaluate existing
initiatives to determine how inclusive they actually are (e.g. affordable housing projects,
zoning by-laws, income supports).

How change was monitored and evaluated: Changes are being monitored by analysing
group progress and discussions. Also, there is self-reported evaluation of an increase in
capacity to understand LICs, and to plan for and evaluate initiatives for inclusivity.

Shortcomings or persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: The focus and scope of this project are specifically on people ageing
with and into disability. A wider scope would have allowed more participants to have been
involved in piloting the Concept Model and Frameworks, using broader initiatives. Moreover,
there is a lack of involvement of more people in various levels of government who are
responsible for formal planning processes within communities.

Other lessons learned: Given the significance of partnerships in this project, it is extremely
important to foster good working relationships and value the input of all project stakeholders.

Contact:
Karen D. Schwartz, E-mail: research1@disabilitystudies.ca
Youn-Young Park, E-mail: research3@disabilitystudies.ca
Case study 6: RIOinclui: Combining architecture, universal design and social work,
construction works for accessibility (Brazil)
Name of organization/Government entity: RIOinclui – Obra Social da Cidade do Rio de
Janeiro

Thematic area of good practice example: Combining architecture, universal design and
social work; construction works for accessibility; and capacity building and social work.

Specific location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Duration of the project/programme: start in 2010, ongoing-

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Children and youth with disabilities.

Implementing agency/agencies: RIOinclui – Obra Social da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro

Source of funds: Donations from physical and legal persons.

Brief background to the project: Persons with disabilities often have lower incomes; their
families have higher expenses to cover; and many hardly ever leave home. Their homes do
not promote mobility, and their day-to-day life is compromised by limited mobility.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: Combining architecture, universal design

and social work, RIOinclui provides accessible housing for children and youths with
disabilities living in poor conditions in the city of Rio de Janeiro. Targeting physical and
social mobility at the same time, the project goes beyond architectural interventions:
reasonable accommodation is created for the beneficiaries and their caregivers. The whole
family is empowered to benefit from statutory social welfare; and a network of local support
is provided.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: The Project is already

implemented. At the end of 2013, 64 houses were built. RIOinclui – Obra Social da Cidade
do Rio de Janeiro was furthermore accredited in 2012 at the Conference of State Parties to the
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and accepted
as a contributing member of the Latin American Network of Non-
Governmental Organizations of Persons with Disabilities and their Families (RIADIS). The
project has reached 320 beneficiaries to date.

Changes achieved: With this project, it was possible to give more perspectives to children
and youth with disabilities living in poor conditions and to fulfil their basic necessities. For
example, the project gave them the mobility to go out and come back to their home, therefore
giving them access to the community and the opportunity to go to school.

RIOinclui’s main focus areas are architecture and social service. For example, a house
that was built in rugged terrain prevented a child with a severe motor disability (a wheelchair
user) from leaving her home. The construction of a platform gave her access to the
community and the opportunity to go to school. Technical knowledge of accessibility, from
the nexus of architecture and social service, can be replicated in any work that seeks to
guarantee human rights to persons with disabilities.
How change was monitored and evaluated: Through home visits conducted by social
workers and architects and also through a local joint network (NGO partners).

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: The greatest challenge will be to turn the programme into public
policy, thus ensuring access to a greater number of users.

Other lessons learned: There is a need to go beyond the adequacy of housing conditions and
to promote the empowerment of the family.

Contact:
Ms. Isabel Cristina Pessôa Gimenes
RIOinclui – Obra Social da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro, Rua São Clemente, 360 Botafogo,
cep:22260-000, Brazil
gimenes.isabel@gmail.com
www.rioinclui.org.br
 Part Two: Transportation

Case study 7: Inclusive Public Transportation (South Africa)

Name of organization/Government entity: Department of Transportation, Public

Transportation Branch

Project/Programme title: Integrated Public Transport Networks: Johannesburg, Cape Town,

Tshwane and Johannesburg

Thematic area of good practice example: Public Transport

Specific location: Gauteng and Western Cape Provinces, South Africa

Duration of project/programme: Differs between operating municipalities

Beneficiaries of good practice example: People with disabilities, the elderly, children,
people accompanying children, and pregnant women (accounting for around 60-65 per cent
of the South African population based on 2011 estimates). All public transport users, as it is a
safer, better integrated and more reliable form of public transport.

Implementing agency/agencies: Implementing municipalities, supported by the province

and national department of transport. Universal access consultants, appointed by
municipalities provide project support directly to them.

Source of funds: National Grant: Public Transport Network Development (PTND),

provincial funding (equitable share) and income generated by the system.

Brief background to the project: The Department of Transport (DoT) is one of the key
government departments piloting a more economically viable and sustainable approach to the
development of urban space through its Integrated Public Transport Networks (IPTNs),
monitored by the PTND.

The Public Transport Strategy 2007 and the Public Transport Network Grant support
the gradual implementation of universal access in public transport and urban spaces as the
most realistic and affordable way of changing cities so that they are inclusive of every one.

The National Land Transport Act identifies vulnerable groups who currently have
difficulties using transport as special needs passengers.
 The principles of universal design, when
applied to urban planning, support other
government directives that encourage
compact, pleasant, environmentally
sustainable urban spaces with mixed-use residential and business nodes. They promote
walking and cycling, as well as easy-to-use public transport for people who live outside the
urban centre or who are unable to walk long distances.

The Integrated Urban Development Framework (IUDF) identifies levers that aim to create
compact cities. Universal design has been highlighted in the report on vulnerable groups as a
necessary approach.18 Although the IUDF is still in the initial stages, DoT is already working
with the suggested approach on municipal transport networks.

The National Development Plan identifies the need to create more compact cities and to re-
organize public transport so that every person can be included in urban life. The method used
by the DoT on transport projects is to target new public transport interventions and apply
relevant national minimum standards. It should be noted that these standards are not new, and
some have been in existence for over 20 years. However, they have only been applied to
urban public space since 2010 and only within the IPTNs.

By using this approach, the DoT sets a new municipal standard within the IPTN. No dates are
set for upgrading services; they are upgraded based on available funds. However, the new
intervention sets a very visible, identifiable and usable standard. In this way, it is simple to
price and plan the improvements required to existing transport services. Implementation of
the upgrading of existing transport services is incremental, with a timetable negotiated with
the DoT.

Overall objectives of the project/programme:

The project aims to be:
 effective in satisfying user needs;
 affordable;
 operating efficiently;
 reliable;
 of an acceptable standard;
 readily accessible;
 operated in conjunction with effective infrastructure provided at reasonable cost;
 safe;
 integrated between modes giving due consideration to the needs of users;
 effective in promoting integrated transport planning.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: Public Transport Strategy, 2007

Changes achieved: In Cape Town, the transport authority of the city, Transport for Cape
Town (TCT) implemented MyCiti, a high-quality bus-based transit system operating since
2009, which has led to the following outcomes:

 There are 31.4 km of bus rapid transit trunk lines,108 km of mixed traffic trunk
corridors and 317 km of feeder bus routes; 31 km of non-motorized transport network
feeding 363 stops with shelters, 222 flag and pole stops, and 42 stations.
 There are 379 universally accessible buses.
 TCT is in the process of costing universal access rollout from an infrastructure and
operational perspective so as to determine the most appropriate process for
implementation. At the same time, a universal access infrastructure audit as well as
the restructuring of its door-to-door, on-demand service, Dial-a-Ride, will be carried
out.
 TCT signed a memorandum of action with the rail implementing agency, PRASA, on
4 May 2015, aiming to integrate bus and rail services (ticket, interchanges, operations
monitoring and management).
 MyCiti carries 78, 825 passengers per day using 379 buses (February 2015).
 Since inception, MyCiTi has carried over 32.5 million passengers (April 2016).
 As of March 2016, there were 37 inter-connected routes serving 42 stations and 366
stops.
 MyCiti is experiencing steady expansion:
o December 2015: 1.4 million passenger journeys
o January 2016: 1.5 million passenger journeys
o February 2016: 1.7 million passenger journeys.

How change was monitored and evaluated

Change was monitored and evaluated by determining the number of passengers using the
system, the number of passenger complaints resolved as a percentage of those received, and
by reporting on the Universal Design Access Plan, which is part of the operational plan.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme:

1. Operating difficulties: The is discord among operators of the current bus operating
companies and previous and current minibus taxi operators.
2. Municipal capacity: There is a lack of experience in planning and operating public
transport of this nature.
3. Geographical spread: South African cities have become economically unviable cities,
which has led to problems in implementing public transport (whether universally
accessible or not) that is unable to run without state subsidy.
4. Universal access: There is a lack of understanding of the complexity of universal access
at the outset of the project, particularly relating to vehicles and infrastructure. Universal
access standards lack thoroughness and are inadequately known.
5. Speed of delivery: There is lack of historical implementation in universal access leads to
slow pace of change.
6. Ethics: there is a professional lack of responsibility from some service providers (of
professional bodies – architects/engineers).
7. Teamwork: There is lack of national and municipal teamwork around a common goal.
8. Unintended costs: Mistakes are made due to lack of knowledge and lack of coordination
between implementing departments.
9. Vested interests: Costs are driven up by over-charging.
10. Evaluation: There are different ways of measuring success due to different unspoken
goals.
11. Due to trying to roll out multiple systems, certain specialist inputs are stretched, and not
enough lessons learned have been able to be shared between projects.

Other lessons learned:

 Information on standards on all aspects of the travel chain is required by municipalities in

the early planning stages so that the network plan is realistic.
 Flexibility is required to find answers to problems for remote or rural areas where road
structure is substandard and normal buses are too heavy.
 No matter how much the municipality prepares, the initial year of operation is a steep
learning curve.
 Municipalities need access to training in running a new model for operating public
transport, which is unlike any model that South Africa has run before.
 The new systems have to be launched alongside increased policing to ensure that private
vehicles do not abuse the infrastructure (driving in bus lanes, illegal parking in bus stops,
or blocking walkways).
 The private sector become involved in the project, recognizing the benefits of having a
Universally Accessible transport system providing a service to them and their tenants.
 In a recent development, the Rabie Group, owners of Century City, a mixed commercial
and residential development, paid the full costs of designing and building the MyCiTi
station on their property, and developed a new, accessible system of wayfinding that is
being introduced across their property. These accessible maps and signs are a direct
development of the accessible maps and signs used throughout the MyCiTi system, to
ensure consistency for users, but tailored to reflect the site’s individual branding.

Contact:
Mr. Guy DAVIES
Disability Solutions (Pty) Ltd, 6 Non Pareille St, Paarl 7646, South Africa
disabilitysolutions@gmail.com
www.disabilitysolutions.co.za
Case study 8: Accessibility standard for public transportation (Indonesia)
Name of organization/Government entity: Department of Transportation, Information, and
Communication, City of Solo (Surakarta), Indonesia

Thematic area of good practice example: Standard of Accessibility of Public Facilities in

Transportation, Information, and Communication for persons with disabilities

Specific location: Solo (Surakarta), Indonesia

Duration of project/programme: Founded in 2006

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Persons with disabilities

Implementing agency/agencies: Department of Transportation, Information, and

Communication

Source of funds: Public (local government) and Private (business sectors)

Brief background to the project: In general, Indonesia has comprehensive legislation

regarding the rights of persons with disabilities as well as their access to different modes of
transportation, e.g. Minister of Transportation Decree No. 71 of 1999. Similarly, the City of
Solo has adopted a comprehensive disability law through Local Regulation No. 2 of 2008 on
Equality of Persons with Disabilities as well as the subsequent Mayor Regulation No. 9 of
2013 on the implementation of the Local Regulation No. 2 of 2008. In addition, the city
adopted two standards: the Standard of Public Building, and Public Facilities of 2006, which
includes accessibility for persons with disabilities and which is managed by the City Space
Management Office.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: Solo’s Standard of Accessibility of Public

Transportation, Information and Communication of 2006 aims to improve accessibility,
safety, and the dignity of people with disabilities and the elderly in the City of Solo, by
promoting adequate measures that support self-sufficiency and well-being.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: Implementation of the Standard of

Accessibility of Public Transportation, Information and Communication of 2006 began in
2008 and is carried out by the Department of Transportation, Information, and
Communication of the local government. The provision on public transportation is enforced
at the national level by the Ministerial Regulation on Technical Guidelines of Facilities and
Accessibility in Buildings and Environment of 2006, while the part concerning information
and communication exists only at Solo City level. In the event that Transportation Services
do not implement the provisions, government officials intervene. Disabled persons
organizations (DPOs) carry out on-the-spot evaluation, coordinate with stakeholders and
obtain funds from sponsors or from the City’s Revenue and Expenditure Budget.

Changes achieved: Solo’s Standard provides a reference for development activities, which
includes the technical planning and execution of constructions, thereby contributing to
creating an accessible built environment. The Standard consists of a series of detailed plans
on how to build accessible facilities. Concerning information and communication, all Solo
government officials now receive, for example, free training in sign language. In addition,
DPOs promote the availability of sign language interpreters in government offices, terminals,
and railway stations, etc., and governmental offices are providing computers with screen
readers. The Standard has been the trigger for the development of the Local Regulation No. 2
of 2008 on Equality of Persons with Disabilities.

How change was monitored and evaluated: Monitoring can be carried out at any time by
persons with disabilities and/or the relevant local government department, supported by civil
society (including mass media). Evaluation has been performed at least once annually. (The
annual comprehensive evaluation is organized by the local government, including
accessibility aspects of development.)

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: Problems with urban spaces, city parks and parking spaces persist. In
addition, accessibility issues may clash with other poverty issues (e.g. beggars) or with space
issues (e.g. rickshaw drivers). A major problem lies with priorities and cost-effectiveness.
Information and communication have not yet been revised in easy or plain language.

Other lessons learned: Disability rights is a crosscutting issue that needs to be mainstreamed
into all local government departments and other development actors, in both civil and
business sectors. To realize disability rights, long-term advocacy is needed to involve and
influence the local government system and structure to reasonably accommodate the rights of
persons with disabilities.

Contact:
Sunarman Sukamto
CBR DTC Solo, Jl. Mendungan RT. 001
RW. 005 No.: 29 Pabelan, Kartasura,
Sukoharjo, Solo (57126)
Mobile/Cellular: +62 81 329 203 898
maman_shg@yahoo.com
/mamansun@gmail.com
www.pprbmsolo.org
Case study 9: Accessibility for people with disabilities to the Bus Rapid Transit system
Metrobus (Mexico)

Name of organization/Government entity: Mexico City Metrobus (Sistema de Corredores

de Transporte Público de Pasajeros del Distrito Federal, Metrobús) is a decentralized body
of the public administration and is under the Department of Mobility of the Government of
Mexico City.

Thematic area of good practice example: Urban Frameworks – Accessible Public

Transport

Specific location: Mexico City, Eje 3 Oriente, Avenida Ingeniero Eduardo Molina. From San
Lazaro station (with modal transfer which intersects with rail lines) to Rio de los Remedios
terminal station.

Duration of project/programme: Construction time of the line: 7 months.

Beneficiaries of a good practice example: The project helped all residents to travel in a
more efficient, safe, rapid, convenient and effective way. Travel time along the corridor was
reduced up to 40 per cent.

The project led to a better use of the public space, providing adequate space for
different users and giving priority to pedestrians, public transportation and bicycles. It also
improved the urban image of the neighbourhood.

The project benefitted people with disabilities as well as people with limited mobility,
such as the elderly, people with baby strollers and children. The accessibility features support
safety measures for all travellers.

Implementing agency/agencies: Department of Public Works, constructors; Metrobus, who

operates the system; The social government agency that coordinated the groups of peoples
with disabilities (transportation service users) and the accessibility consultant; the Institute of
Transportation and Development Policy that served as a consultant in the design process;
World Resources Institute (WRI) EMBARQ.

Source of funds: Federal and city funds

Brief background to the project: In 2002, EMBARQ, which is the WRI Centre for
Sustainable Transport, signed an agreement with the Government of Mexico City to
introduce the Programme for Sustainable Transport. The agreement aimed at improving
mobility, accessibility and quality of life for residents, reducing travel time and improving the
quality of existing services. This consisted in introducing a modern mass transit system, the
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridor. In addition to addressing the bus service issue, the BRT
Metrobus project emerged in the context of the city’s efforts to reduce air pollution in Mexico
City.

In 2008, Mexico ratified the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
As a result, the local government integrated in its political agenda, accessibility to people
with disabilities, including in transport and the update of building regulations.
 In 2005, the first BRT system, Metrobus line 1, was opened, which provided limited
accessibility features. The expansion of the system, influenced by the Convention, as well as
by social and technical changes and political events, promoted the progressive evolution of
the accessibility criteria. Metrobus line 5, which opened in 2013, was the first line that
integrated the accessibility criteria with a better understanding of the relationship between
stations, public space, operation and bus transfer.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The aim of the project was to provide a safe
reliable service and easy access, taking into consideration people with disabilities.

Accessibility components considered were:

 In stations: enclosed stations with raised platforms for high-floor buses, ramps to
station entrances, and accessible paths to bus doors, gratuity service with an
accessible entrance gate, tactile walking surface indicators from the station entrance to
the preferential boarding area, tactile signs, buttons to alert bus drivers to minimize
the gap between the platform and bus floor, and accessible toilets.

 Buses: A dedicated bus lane with low emission buses, wheelchair access and spaces
for wheelchair, audible and visual alarms on buses for closing doors, and preferential
seats.

 Public space to station entrance: accessible sidewalks along the length of the BRT line
corridor, accessible pedestrian crossings using traffic control to the median stations
with audible signals for pedestrian traffic lights, and tactile warnings at curb ramps.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: The building authority checked

over the architectural plans with an accessibility consultant looking at the accessibility
standards of the local building regulations.

A government social agency was the coordinator of the groups of users with different
types of disabilities. For example, a group of people with visual disabilities, who had
previously acted as accessibility evaluators, were asked to test the tactile signage before their
installation at the station. After installation, the group was asked to go to the station to ensure
that their location was adequate in relation to the tactile warning surface.

Changes achieved: Accessibility for persons with disabilities was improved compared to
previous Metrobus lines. For persons with disabilities, the new accessibility features improve
their mobility by giving them access to the public transport network and making the city
more liveable for them.

How change was monitored and evaluated: There was a final walk tour with the disability
group, and issues were raised on certain accessibility features. Travellers with disabilities can
submit complaints to the Metrobus operator, which will contribute to assess if the system is
functioning properly.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme:

1. There were time constraints to finishing the construction work. As a result, there was no
time to review in greater detail certain necessary accessibility features. For example, to
ensure accessibility and safety in pedestrian crossing points, there was a lack of time to
analyse and redesign intersections.

2. The response of the access consultants and the disability group was sometimes too late for
the construction process.

3. There was a lack of suppliers who could address the accessibility requirements. For
example, the tactile signage received several comments by the group of persons with visual
disabilities, but the manufacturer could not meet the accessibility criteria, such as colour
contrast or quality of the raised characters with the material requested (stainless steel).

4. At the time of construction, changes had to be made to the project because of unexpected
situations. In addition, the work tends to be outsourced between two or more companies,
which may not have the same detailed criteria.

5. Due to changes of government officials in charge of the building work for Metrobus
projects, the accessibility criteria had to be re-addressed from the start, with briefings to show
the progress made in previous lines.
 6. No technical accessibility guidelines for the Metrobus system are published that
would allow to maintain the quality as well as the successful accessible growth
system independent of political cycles.

Other lessons learned:

1. The operation of the Metrobus system must be assessed at an early stage to ensure
accessibility to the premises.

2. The “last mile” is still a problem for people with disabilities, especially for wheelchair
users to travel from home to the Metrobus stations.

3. Line or modal transfer needs to be addressed when building other Metrobus lines. This
should include accessible pathways and signage.

4. Participation of users with disabilities is a key element for success; however, effective
participation requires an accessibility consultant who can translate user requirements into
technical language, which would facilitate the process for the constructors.

5. Government officials should make better informed decisions on mobility for people with
disabilities. They should provide open and dynamic bridges of communication with persons
with disabilities and all relevant stakeholders.

6. The technical accessibility guidelines for Metrobus must be flexible and kept up-to-date.

7. More efforts are needed by Metrobus.to improve current accessibility criteria.

Contact:
Janett Jimenez
Can Lah. S.C, Mexico
Email: jimesan@yahoo.com
Case study 10: Multi-Modal Transportation Accessibility in San Francisco (United States)
Name of organization/Government entity: San Francisco Municipal Transportation
Agency (SFMTA)

Project/Programme title: Multi-Modal Transportation Accessibility

Thematic area of good practice example: Multi-modal access to a North American city

Specific location: All modes of transportation throughout the city of San Francisco, from
pedestrian to vehicular modes

Duration of project/programme: Accessibility for persons with disabilities has been

mandated in the United States since the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was enacted
in 1990; however, the city of San Francisco had initiated efforts to make its transportation
system accessible for persons with disabilities decades before the ADA, and accessibility
considerations, including efforts to exceed ADA requirements, are ongoing.

Beneficiaries of good practice example: All people travelling within the city of San
Francisco benefit from the accessibility of the transportation system, both people with
disabilities and members of the general public for whom travel is made easier by
improvements such as curb cuts on sidewalks and ramps on buses.

Implementing agency/agencies: SFMTA and other public agencies

Source of funds: Government

Brief background to the project: The SFMTA is a department of the City and County of
San Francisco, and is responsible for the management of all ground transportation in the city.
The SFMTA plans, designs, builds, operates, regulates and maintains one of the most diverse
transportation networks in the world. In addition to the four modes of transportation (transit,
walking, bicycling and driving, which includes private vehicles, taxis, car-sharing, on-and
off-street parking and commercial vehicles), the Agency directly oversees five transit modes
(bus, trolley bus, light rail, historic streetcar and cable car). Also, the Agency oversees
paratransit service, which serves individuals unable to use the fixed-route transit service.

The SFMTA’s public transit system, the San Francisco Municipal Railway (Muni), is the
eighth largest transit system in the United States, with approximately 750,000 weekday
boardings on fixed route modes, 510,000 annual paratransit van trips and 270,000 annual
paratransit taxi trips. Walking and bicycling are common modes of transportation in the city.
Nearly a fifth of the 4 million trips that San Franciscans and visitors take each day are
entirely by foot, and there are an estimated 82,000 bicycle trips in San Francisco per day.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The SFMTA, in partnership with other City
and County agencies, works to make sure that all modes of transportation are accessible for
persons with disabilities. At a minimum, this means ensuring compliance with the ADA
requirements, but often the Agency aims to exceed the ADA requirements. SFMTA has four
core values for the transportation network, one of which is “Social Equity and Access:
Prioritize the most affordable and accessible modes.”
Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: The table below summarizes the
existing accessibility features on each transportation mode, as well as SFMTA’s ongoing
efforts to improve accessibility.

Changes achieved: The table summarizes the accessibility features implemented on each
transportation mode.

How change was monitored and evaluated: One method that SFMTA uses to monitor and
evaluate the accessibility of the transportation system is to solicit ongoing input from the
community. The Multimodal Accessibility Advisory Committee (MAAC) is a group of
seniors and customers with disabilities who regularly use SFMTA services and provide input
on accessibility-related projects. The Paratransit Coordinating Council (PCC) is an advisory
body for customers, service providers, social service agency representatives, and others to
provide input on the paratransit program.

Another method that SFMTA uses to monitor accessibility is customer satisfaction

surveys. In the annual Muni Customer Satisfaction Survey, when customers are asked to rank
Muni’s performance in different areas, “accessibility for persons with disabilities” is
consistently the highest ranked attribute. In the 2015 survey, 78 percent of respondents
ranked accessibility for persons with disabilities as “excellent” or “good.”
Mode/Service Existing Accessibility Features Ongoing Efforts to Improve
Accessibility
Muni Buses 1. Wheelchair Lifts and Ramps. All buses are equipped with either mechanical lifts or 1. When the San Francisco
wheelchair ramps. Municipal Transportation
2. Securement Areas. All Muni buses have at least two wheelchair securement areas. Agency (SFMTA) purchases
3. Kneelers. Kneelers lower the front steps of accessible buses by several inches, making new buses, Accessible Services
it easier for customers to board the bus, especially if boarding from the street. staff and disability advisory
4. Priority Seating. Priority seating is provided for seniors and people with disabilities. groups provide input on the
5. Stanchions and straps. Vertical and horizontal poles for standing customers to hold on accessibility of the design.
to for stability, as well as hanging straps and hand holds, are provided throughout the 2. Accessible Services staff
vehicle. provide ongoing training to
6. Destination Signs. On most vehicles, digital signs on the front, sides and rear display new Muni operators on how to
the line name and destination. A recorded voice announces the same information to use the accessible features of
waiting passengers whenever the doors open. the vehicles and facilities, and
7. Automated Stop Announcements. On most vehicles, a recorded voice automatically how to provide the best
announces the upcoming stops prior to arrival, digital signs simultaneously display the possible service to persons
same information. with disabilities.
Mode/Service Existing Accessibility Features Ongoing Efforts to Improve
Accessibility
Muni Metro 3. Overview. The Muni Metro light rail system features six lines. Downtown, the Metro 10. SFMTA continues to conduct
Light Rail runs underground, and all stops are accessible at high level. In the neighbourhoods, a stop analysis in order to
System trains run at street level and accessible raised wayside platform stops are located at prioritize potential new stop
major destinations and transfer points. locations for accessible Muni
4. Priority seating. Priority seating is provided for seniors and customers with Metro wayside platforms in the
disabilities. neighbourhoods. As locations
5. Stairs can be raised or lowered. The stairwells on all Muni Light Rail Vehicles are prioritized, feasibility
(LRVs) can be raised or lowered. For stations at high-level platforms, such as those in determined, and funds secured,
the underground stations and at some surface stations, level boarding is provided at all Muni-Metro accessible stops
doors with the stairs in the raised position. For street level stops on the surface in some are added.
neighbourhoods, steps are lowered to provide access to curb height islands via stairs. 11. When the SFMTA purchases
At key surface stations, wheelchair accessibility is provided at mini-high wayside new LRVs, Accessible
platforms using the raised steps. Services staff and disability
6. Dedicated Area for Mobility Devices. Each LRV is equipped with accessible seating advisory groups provide input
areas. on the accessibility of the
7. Underground Stations Wayfinding. All underground station entrances are easily design.
identified by new sidewalk signage –
8. Automated Announcements. In the underground stations, a digital voice
announcement system announces the route designation and arrival time of approaching
and arriving trains. Announcements of upcoming stations are made inside the train.
9. Tactile Maps. Maps of the Metro system with Braille and raised characters are
installed on the concourse and platforms levels of underground stations.
Mode/Service Existing Accessibility Features Ongoing Efforts to Improve
Accessibility
Historic 12. Overview. Most of the historic streetcar stops on the Muni’s F-line include In the next few years, the Better
Streetcars accessible wayside boarding platforms (i.e. elevated platforms that that are accessible Market Street project will update
via a ramp). In the core of downtown San Francisco, accessible stops are located at key transit services on Market street.
locations only. Four of the stops that are accessible have mechanical lifts (i.e. wayside All stops on the F-Market
lifts) to raise the passenger to the level of the car floor. Historic Streetcar line will be
13. Stop request buttons and wheelchair stationing areas. SFMTA has three main accessible, and at least three of
types of historic streetcars. The most common type of vehicle, the President the wayside lifts will be replaced
th
Conference Cars (PCCs), which ran in many American cities back in the mid-20 with the easier-to-maintain and
century, have been refurbished and modified to provide two wheelchair stationing areas more reliable wayside platforms.
with stop request buttons. The second type, the “Milan” from Milan, Italy, has access
via a ramp to the rear door and plenty of space at the rear of the vehicle to position a
wheelchair. The third type is a multitude of cars from around the world that have been
modified to allow the use of ramp for access to the cars.
Travel 14. Travel Training. Free Travel Training is available for individuals who would like 15. SFMTA staff provide
Training to improve their transit skills or gain more experience using the Muni bus and rail ongoing promotion of the
system. travel training at senior and
disabled community outreach
events.
Paratransit 16. Detailed Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations specify the 17. Peer Escort Project. While
Van Service requirements for complementary paratransit service, including service criteria, types of not required by the ADA,
service options, operational performance, and other factors. San Francisco has two van SFMTA recently began to offer
services: SF Access, which provides pre-scheduled shared ride services to individuals a peer escort programme, in
based on reservations made 1 to 7 days in advance, and standing reservations. Group which senior volunteers are
Van Services ,which provides pre-scheduled services to groups of disabled individuals provided a stipend to
going to one location like an Adult Day Health Center, Senior Center or a shared work accompany and provide extra
site. assistance to “attendant
required” (“ATR”) paratransit
riders, such as riders with
dementia.
Mode/Service Existing Accessibility Features Ongoing Efforts to Improve
Accessibility
Paratransit 18. Overview. Paratransit Taxi is a programme in which SFMTA provides a subsidy to 21. Electronic taxi hailing
Taxi Service persons who are ADA-eligible to purchase taxi rides. All taxis in San Francisco are (e-Hail) mobile application.
required to participate in the SF Paratransit programme, and the rider calls the taxi SFMTA has partnered with
provider directly to schedule the ride, just as a member of the general public would. Flywheel, a mobile
This is not an ADA service, but many riders find that it better meets their transportation application that allows users
needs. to electronically hail, track,
19. Taxi Debit Card. In 2011, SFMTA replaced paper taxi vouchers with a taxi debit and pay for taxi trips, to
card programme. All taxi operators in the city have In-Taxi Equipment (ITE) that develop a customized version
accepts SF Paratransit Taxi Debit Card payments. The taxi debit card programme of their existing application,
allows for better trip and program monitoring and reduces opportunities for fraud. which will allow SF
20. Ramp Taxi Incentive Program. SFMTA provides various incentives for drivers to Paratransit taxi riders to
pick up wheelchair customers, including financial incentives for each wheelchair trip electronically request and pay
provided (see Figure 1). for their taxi trip using their
smartphone (see Figure 2).
Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the
project/programme:

 Ramp Taxi Challenges – Ramp taxi vehicles are the least popular type of vehicle for
both taxi companies and for drivers due to the higher fuel costs, maintenance costs
and the purchase price of wheelchair-accessible vans. Consequently, it has always
been more difficult to fill ramp taxi shifts and even more so, since the growth of
Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) such as Uber and Lyft. To address this,
SFMTA has introduced additional ramp taxi incentives, and is partnering with
Flywheel19 to develop a mobile e-Hail application.20
 Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) – With the recent proliferation of
Transportation Network Companies (TNCs) such as Uber and Lyft, SFMTA, in its
role of the taxi regulator for the City and County of San Francisco, has been working
with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the regulator of the TNC
industry, to in order to ensure that this new mode of on-demand transportation is
regulated in such a way that it is accessible for persons with disabilities, including
wheelchair users.

Other lessons learned: For countries with inaccessible infrastructure and transit vehicles,
and limited financial resources, SFMTA’s accessibility solution for our Historic Streetcar
Line may be particularly interesting. For passengers boarding and exiting at accessible
wayside platforms along the Historic Streetcar line, SFMTA developed a highly affordable,
low-tech, solution to bridge the gap between the streetcar and the wayside lifts and platforms.
Rather than retrofitting the vehicle to install a mechanical ramp or lift, there is simply a
bridge plate, essentially a piece of metal with a tactile warning surface and lips at the side,
which is folded and stored vertically behind the operator’s seat. When needed, the operator
manually places that bridge plate between the car and the platform to allow passengers to
cross into the car.

Contact:
Ms. Annette Williams
Manager, Accessible Services Program
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
One South Van Ness Avenue, Seventh Floor
San Francisco, CA 94103-5417
www.sfmta.com
annette.williams@sfmta.com

19
Flywheel is an e-Hail application available at: www.flywheelnow.com.
20
E-hailing is the process of ordering any form of transportation pick up via virtual devices: computer or mobile device.

48
Case study 11: Visual and acoustic information on public buses (Spain)

Name of organization/Government entity: Empresa Municipal de Transportes de Madrid

(EMT Madrid)

Thematic area of good practice example: Public Transport

Specific location: Madrid, Spain

Duration of project/programme: Several projects constantly evolving.

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Persons with visual or hearing impairments

Implementing agency/agencies: EMT Madrid

Source of funds: Public funds

Brief background to the project: Public transportation is not easily accessible for persons
with visual and hearing impairments who would like to navigate the city in a safe and
independent way. The use and further development of Information and Communications
Technology (ICT) applications help to make public transportation more accessible. The aim
of the project is to make the use of the public bus transportation easier for everyone,
regardless of their physical, mental or sensory conditions.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The project aims to enable the safe and
independent use of public bus transportation for persons with visual or hearing impairments,
also designed to assist persons with all physical, mental or sensory conditions. A new
information technology has been developed and mobile applications introduced.

To facilitate the use of the bus service by persons with visual impairments, visual and
acoustic information is provided both inside and outside the vehicle. It indicates the position
of the bus, the line number, the direction, and information about the route once the bus
arrives at the bus stop. The information panels at the bus stop include audio information that
can be activated through a simple button or by activating Bluetooth on the mobile phone. A
telephone service provides automatic information about the estimated time of arrival at each
stop. The website has also been created in an accessible way.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: The company makes its own

technological designs and makes public tenders for the implementation of fabrications,
supplies and facilities.

49
Changes achieved:
A series of actions that introduced the concepts of ICT have been implemented:
 visual and acoustic information systems installed inside and outside the bus and at bus
stops;
 systems based on mobile phones, with voice recognition and synthesis;
 innovative mobile applications, such as a voice guidance system to use the bus.
 innovative Smart TV and wearables applications;
 an Open Data Platform in order to third parties can develop even more apps and
functionalities.

How change was monitored and evaluated:

 1,900 vehicles of EMT provide visual and audio information;
 800 information panels at bus stops;
 Applications and Open Data Platform receive 30 million visits per month.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme:
 Lack of integration with other apps and urban systems (traffic, parking, other public
transport modes, etc.);
 needs to be constantly updated and aligned with new operating systems and devices;
 needs for enhanced collaboration with stakeholders and disability community.

Other lessons learned:

 Accessible mobility, the option to travel around Madrid on public transport, is a key
factor for social participation and for gaining access to all the services available in the
city.
 Accessible mobility is now a reality for everyone in Madrid as a result of an
innovative above-ground urban transport
network.

Contact:
Mr. Enrique DIEGO BERNARDO
Empresa Municipal de Transportes de Madrid C/
Cerro de la Plata, 4, 28007 Madrid, Spain

50
+34-91 40 68 849
enrique.diego@emtmadrid.es
www.emtmadrid.es

Part Three: Public spaces and public services including information and communication
technology- (ICT) based services

Case study 12: Including persons with disabilities in access to safe sanitation: (Ethiopia)

Project/programme title: Including disabled people in access to safe sanitation: a case study
from Ethiopia

Thematic area/s of good practice example: Access to sanitation and hygiene

Specific location: Ethiopia, Southern Nations Nationalities and People’s Region (SNNPR),
Butajira town

Duration of project: February to September 2009

Beneficiaries of best practice example: People with physical and hearing impairments and
non-disabled community members

Impairment/s targeted: People with mobility and hearing impairments

Implementing agency/agencies: WaterAid, Progynist (an Ethiopian women’s empowerment

NGO, www.bds-ethiopia.net/progynist.html) and private sector contractors

Source of funds: WaterAid

Brief background to the project and to the selected practice: The Government of Ethiopia
(GoE) has adopted a number of laws, policies and standards with a disability focus. In
relation to the provision of basic Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) services, the most
relevant guidelines are: Article 41.5 of the Constitution of the Federal Democratic Republic
of Ethiopia (1995) and the National Programme of Action for Rehabilitation of Persons with
Disabilities (1999). Ethiopia also aims to implement the Action Plan established for the
African Decade of Persons with Disabilities (extended to December 2019). Despite the
existence of these policies and frameworks, the GoE standard designs for WASH facilities in
Ethiopia are not accessible to people with disabilities.

In 2006, WaterAid (WA) in Ethiopia conducted research into the barriers people with
disabilities face when accessing safe WASH facilities. Informants were members of Fana, a
disabled persons’ organization (DPO) with 62 members in Butajira town, SNNPR. A key
research recommendation was to incorporate accessible designs within the WASH sector.

51
Overall objectives of the project/programme: In 2009, WA in Ethiopia piloted accessible
sanitation and showers in a building administered by Fana as a small-scale pilot project. Key
objectives of the project were: (i) to meet the sanitation and hygiene needs of the Fana
members; (b) to raise the profile of disability issues within WASH in Ethiopia; (iii) to draw
from lessons learned and encourage other actors (the government, development agencies, the
private sector) to mainstream inclusive WASH in WA Ethiopia—this is the component
selected as a best practice; and (iv) to generate learning for WA globally.

Process/strategy used to implement the project/programme: WA provided the funds and

developed the pilot project in consultation with the Fana management committee, Progynist,
and the local government. It also provided technical advice and support throughout the
project. Progynist liaised with Fana members, local government officials and the private
sector. The city’s Water and Sewerage Bureau assigned its employees with the task of
installing a water supply for the Fana building, and the private sector constructed two
accessible toilets and two accessible showers. The project has an income-generation
component, since a fee is charged for using the showers for non-disabled community
members. Two members of the Fana management committee participated in the design and
implementation of the project, advising on construction, carrying out basic construction and
managing the project once completed.

Changes achieved: The pilot project achieved changes in the following areas:
Awareness-raising: At the community level, achievements can be claimed in addressing
attitudinal barriers as the project raised public awareness of disability issues. The Fana
management committee also provides a service (toilets and showers) for non-disabled people,
which shows that disabled people are capable of earning an income. In addition, the Fana
management committee, who live in the Fana building, reported significant benefits from
being in close proximity to the facilities. At the national level, WA raised the profile of
disability within the WASH sector in Ethiopia by disseminating research and publications
nationally and internationally through networks and the media.

Research: WA in Ethiopia was one of the first WA country programmes to pilot accessible
toilets within its work. The WA team in Ethiopia has now committed to mainstreaming
inclusive development within all areas of its programming, as is WA globally.

Policies: Lessons learned from the pilot project informed the WA Equity and Inclusion
Framework that guides the implementation of the Equity and Inclusion Policy of WA. Rather
than disability being a stand-alone topic or policy, it should be included in the WA Equity
and Inclusion Framework. Of a total of 26 programmes, 15 WA country programmes now
have a specific focus on disability in their country strategies.

Shortcomings or persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: The best practice example could have been improved in the following
ways:

 by undertaking mainstream inclusive development in all areas of work rather than

targeting disabled groups as a stand-alone activity. Intervention should be
designed to address environmental, social/attitudinal and institutional barriers;

52
  by conducting a stakeholder analysis that incorporates an assessment of power,
age, gender and impairment during the project planning phase. Other aspects
could be added, as appropriate; these could include ethnicity, religion and caste;

 by recognizing that full participation is unrealistic within resource constraints;

 by making empowerment more specific, measurable and achievable. Using the

information gained from the stakeholder power analysis, activities could be
developed to improve specific power relations.

Contact:
Jane Wilbur, Principles Officer, Equity, Inclusion and Rights, WaterAid.
E-mail: janewilbur@wateraid.org; tel: +44 20 7793 4567.
Mahider Tesfu, Senior Equity and Inclusion Officer, WaterAid in Ethiopia.
E-mail: mahidertesfu@WA.org; tel: +251 11661680

53
Case study 13: Transforming an unused piece of land into an inclusive public space (Mexico)

Name of organization/Government entity: Secretaría del Medio Ambiente del Gobierno

del Distrito Federal (SEDEMA, Department of Environment of the Government of Mexico
City)

Initiative selected as best practice sample: Reclaiming of public space by creating pocket
parks through an inclusive approach since the early stage. Participation of the community on
public spaces decisions and involvement of accessibility expertise.

Thematic area of good practice example: Inclusive urban spatial development. Urban
regeneration to improve the quality of life in the neighbourhood. Design of public spaces
considering community needs.

Specific location: Metro Tezozomoc Pocket Park, Corner of Eje 4 Ahuehuetes and Av.
Sauces, Colonia Pasteros, Delegación Azcapotzalco, México City, near Tezozómoc Metro
Station.

Duration of project/programme:
Design phase: two months
Construction phase: three months

Beneficiaries of good practice example: The park benefits around 18 thousand people living
in the municipality, providing activities for different ages and for persons with disabilities:

 a playground for children;

 a skate park for youths;
 a seating area and dancing fountain for families and communities to gather and
socialize, including people with limited mobility.

Implementing agency/agencies:
 SEDEMA
 Espacios Verdes Integrales S.A. (building construction company)
 Tecnósfera, S.C. (urban and landscape designers)
 Can Lah, S.C. (access consultant)

Source of funds: Due to a mitigation measure whereby a private company had to

environmentally enhance a specific public space, the pocket park was funded by the company
itself.

Brief background to the project: Azcapotzalco is one of Mexico City’s 16 municipalities

and is a centre of industry. According to the National Institute of Statistic and Geography
(INEGI), 37.4 per cent of the land of the demarcation is for industrial use. Housing in the
municipality is varied. Most residential buildings are of two or three floors, and apartment
buildings average five floors. Infrastructure is in a poor condition, mainly the asphalt, water
networks, drainage and public lighting. Due to its industrial character, there is heavy vehicle
traffic and there are few open spaces.

The land owned by the City in Azcapatzalco was an unused plot with a concrete slab.
Previously, it was used as a parking lot and later abandoned with a fence around the land. The

54
land is located at a block corner close to a station of the City Metro transportation system
with an area of 1,477.31 m2.

Groups of skateboarders gathered around the area making it difficult for pedestrians to
use the street and reach the Metro Station. The urban image of the area was run down with
trash, abandoned vehicles and graffiti and was unsafe for passersby.

Overall objectives of the project/programme:

1. Reclaim unused land through the construction of the largest pocket park in Mexico City.

2. Activities to promote recreation, culture, social interaction and fun. The integration of users
is sought through activities that define four areas that highlight and enhance a space with a
contemporary design creating a friendly space for each activity:

 Central plaza with seating areas: 550 m2.

 Dancing fountain accessible for wheelchair users: 60 m2.
 Attractive ramps for the skate park: 560 m2.
 Secure children play area with play components: 132 m2.

3. Visibility for safety. The pocket park is designed in such a way that any standing point
inside the park allows for full visibility of the surrounding space. In addition, lighting was
designed to fully illuminate the open space at night.

4. Use of universal design as a concept and principle. Universal design principles were used
for the design of the built elements for the landscape features; for example, the pedestrian
ramp to the children play area, the tactile walking surface indicators (TWSI) indicating tactile
routes, the tactile-visual maps for orientation, visual contrast for different elements, and
handrails were all installed.

5. Environmental sustainability: Solar street lights were installed. To provide oxygen and
increase permeable surfaces, 22 trees were planted in green areas. An automatic irrigation
system was installed to provide watering the green areas of the pocket park with a minimal
use of water.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: Negotiations were carried out

between SEDEMA and the investor for the mitigation measure. Once decided on the
intervention land area, the community was ask about their needs and encouraged to be
involved in the process.

Since the beginning of the process, it was suggested that pocket park should be
inclusive to all people, and that a programme should be established considering the different
community needs in one space. One of the requirements was that even though there were
areas with specific activities, the pocket park should link them together and make the park
environmental sustainable by designing them with a low maintenance cost.

The building construction company hired the urban and landscape designers to design
something original in the city. An analysis, diagnostic, zoning, architectural plans and the
executive project were carried out. Since the design stage, universal design was considered in
the project by hiring an access consultant. In order to comply with Mexico City’s 2011 TWSI

55
building standard, molds had to be made by the supplier. The installation criteria followed the
standard and the best practice approved by persons with visual impairments.

The construction phase started with the building works, such as the walls, floors,
ramps of the skate park, a ramp to the play area and drainage. Street furniture such as
handrails, solar street lighting and seating benches were installed together with children´s
play components and, finally, vegetation.

The Major of Mexico City, the Head of the Department of Environment of Mexico
City, the local authority and other government agencies presided over the opening ceremony.
They became interested in the project because of the concept of inclusion and the accessible
building elements. It was the first park with TWSI and with tactile maps in Mexico City.

Changes achieved:
The project achieved the following outcomes:

1. Awareness was raised among different stakeholders that making inclusive spaces is in
the best interest of everyone. There was a media release and local government report
of the new pocket park. The pocket park gave an example of how to approach urban
regeneration by reclaiming unused land and the implementation of policies for
inclusion by creating inclusive public spaces.

2. The investor and construction company became aware that spending money on
accessibility features benefitted different users, and that this experience may inspire
others in future projects to be inclusive. The urban and landscape designers became
familiar with universal design principles and gained knowledge of local products and
materials available for the accessibility features.

3. The neighbours believed that something positive was gained for the community.
Residents use the pocket park as a meeting point, particularly the group of
skateboarders. Neighbours are involved in the maintenance of the pocket park and
they keep the park clean by sweeping the floor and watch for people not to throw
garbage in the street and pocket park.

How change was monitored and evaluated: The pocket park was opened in September
2014 and it has not been formally monitored or evaluated. However, during the first six
months, the community took care of the pocket park. For example, one of the play

56
components (the chicken) broke, and the neighbours themselves fixed it. Graffiti was painted
on the tip of the play rocket and the neighbours erased it. By observation, the park is used at
different times of the day.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: The main challenge was to include universal design principles and
change the traditional paradigms throughout the project with the different stakeholders
involved. The urban and landscape designers had to convince others to make an inclusive
pocket park with accessible building elements. For example, they convinced the investor to
install the TWSI guide route.

Finding a supplier for tactile maps was not an easy task. Stainless steel maps were
selected as part of the design but no suppliers were found to do the job, so acrylic and
aluminium were the materials finally used for it. To lower the costs, recycled material was
used to support the tactile maps. The budget was insufficient for buying other play
components.

Organizing the neighbours took time, and support is still needed to keep them together
so that they feel that the public space was created for them and belongs to them. It is also
important to maintain the space in good condition.

Other lessons learned: Even though there is still room for improvement, the Metro
Tezozómoc Pocket Park can be used as a model for the design and construction of other
public spaces. Creating awareness about the need of inclusive spaces is the first step to
achieve the objective, and involvement and participation of the community is essential.

Contact:
Janett Jimenez
Can Lah. S.C, Mexico
Email: jimesan@yahoo.com

57
Case study 14: City of Lucca – Becoming Accessible (Italy)

Name of organization/Government entity: Fondazione Banca del Monte di Lucca

Thematic area of good practice example: Accessibility in historical cities

Specific location: Lucca, Tuscany, Italy

Duration of project/programme: 2010-2016

Beneficiaries of good practice example: From the outset, the strength has been the
involvement of people with disabilities. The Foundation strongly believes that it is impossible
to even think about a project improving accessibility without first asking them what they
would appreciate, but it is a project for all citizens and tourists.

Implementing agency/agencies: Fondazione Banca del Monte di Lucca

Source of funds: Foundation and private grants

Brief background to the project: Lucca is old historical city with a significant cultural
heritage, and there is need to make it more accessible, to the extent possible, for all. There is
an economic opportunity to increase tourism.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: An old historical city with a huge cultural
heritage and the need to make it more accessible, to the extent possible, for all. An economic
opportunity to increase tourism.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme:

 Creating a solution that allows people to move and live better in their own town, to be
part of events, to reach public spaces easily; and to raise awareness on disability
issues, inclusion and respect.
 Studying a prototype with a public university to allow persons with visual
impairments to visit the City Walls autonomously.
 Cooperating with disabled people to test new solutions for an historical town, such as
Lucca.
 Exchanging ideas and peer learning from the other foundations and subjects involved
in the European Project of the League (LHAC). Disseminating the experience and
presenting replicable solutions.
 Involving persons with disabilities, in order to convey practical suggestions based on
real needs.
 Creating more than 5 km of accessible routes, a path for visually impaired people on
the City Walls (4.5 km). Creating a logo and an accessible website where all
information are collected.

58
Changes achieved: At the European level, a practical guide was formulated with the
experiences and solutions of this project. At the local level, an improvement on the awareness
and a starting point for new future regulations. Awareness of disability issues was raised
among the community has been an important by-product of the initiative and an important
step on the road to inclusion.

How change was monitored and evaluated: It was evaluated by European bodies:
www.lhac.eu/resources/toolip/doc/2015/07/23/evaluation-last-version-excel.pdf

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: Awaiting the Accessibility Act as a milestone to pursue new
objectives.

Other lessons learned: There are many good ideas for accessibility, but it is difficult to
involve people to work together for a common goal and to communicate effectively.
However, it is only by working together on disability issues that the environment and people
can change, together.

Contact:
Elizabeth Franchini
elizabeth.franchini@fondazionebmlucca.it
Fondazione Banca del Monte di Lucca

59
Case study 15: Changing Places (United Kingdom)

Name of organization/Government entity: Changing Places Consortium

Thematic area of good practice example: Campaign to provide accessible toilets in public
places

Specific location: United Kingdom

Duration of project/programme: Started in 2006 and is an ongoing project.

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Persons with disabilities

Implementing agency/agencies: Changing Places Consortium – Centre for Accessible

Environments, Pamis, Mencap, and other experts in the field of learning disability.

Source of funds: Sponsorship via Aveso (www.aveso.co.uk)

Brief background to the project: Due to the lack of suitable toilets, persons with disabilities
who need assistance cannot take part in many activities such as shopping and going to a park
or a show. Without a suitable changing bench and hoist, many persons with disabilities have
to be laid on unhygienic toilet floors.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The Changing Places Consortium is

campaigning to build more accessible toilets in all major public places, including city centres,
shopping centres, arts venues, hospitals, motorway service stations, leisure complexes, large
railway stations, airports etc. Changing Places toilets are different from standard accessible
toilets because they include special equipment such as a height-adjustable changing bench
and a hoist, offer adequate space in the changing area for up to two carers, and provide a
centrally placed toilet with room on either side for the carers.

A Changing Places toilet provides equipment, space and facilities (including hoist and
adult-sized changing bench) for persons with disabilities who need assistance and cannot use
standard accessible toilets. Changing Places toilets should be provided in addition to standard
accessible toilets.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: The Changing Places campaign

has ensured that there are over 800 Changing Places toilets currently in the United Kingdom
with the aim of having 1,000 by 2017/18. Individuals and companies may commit themselves
to building a Changing Places toilet on their premises according to the provided standards
and requirements. Their toilet will then be listed on the map of Changing Places, which
allows beneficiaries to find locations with appropriate toilets. There are also mobile Changing
Places toilets available to rent for large and small events.

Changes achieved:
 Currently over 800 Changing Places toilets in the United Kingdom
 Estimated equipment cost: GBP 12,000 – 15,000 incl. VAT

60
How change was monitored and evaluated: There are many examples of campaigning
success and how Changing Places have changed people’s lives. Regular news stories are
posted on the Changing Places’ website www.changing-places.org/news.aspx

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: Main challenges are venues obtaining funding for Changing Places
projects and the lack space available in some venues for Changing Places that meet the
British Standard.

The consortium work with providers, architects, installers and campaigners to make
sure that the best results are achieved and that the projects meet the British Standard when
possible.

Other lessons learned: Clear information must be available. People are encouraged to work
with the Changing Places consortium through the process of installation.

Contact:
Mr. Michael LE-SURF
Changing Places Consortium
Mencap, 123, Golden Lane
London EC1Y 0RT, United Kingdom
+44-20 7454 0454
www.changing-places.org

61
Case study 15: Accessible Musholm, a unique accessibility and universal designed Vacation
– Sports – Conference Centre for people with physical, cognitive and communication
disabilities (Denmark)
Name of organization/Government entity: Accessible Musholm

Thematic area of good practice example: Accessible tourism and conferences

Specific location: Korsør, Denmark

Duration of project/programme: 2008-2015

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Persons with any kind of physical, cognitive and
communication disabilities, including both private persons and institutions.

Implementing agency/agencies: Musholm, Vacation – Sports – Conference

Source of funds: Arbejdsmarkedets Feriefond (The Labour Market Holiday Foundation),

Realdania, A.P. Møller & Hustru Chastine Mc-Kinney Møllers Fond til Almene Formaal,
The City of Slagelse, Muskelsvindfonden (Musclar Dystrophy Foundation of Denmark)

Brief background to the project: People with disabilities want exciting experiences during
holidays, sports and conference activities. Yet, many resorts are not accessible. Not only due
to physical boundaries, but also a lack of services, attitudes and hospitality that would show
people with disabilities that they are welcome.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The overall objective is to create a holiday

resort where persons with disabilities can participate on an equal basis with others. At the
Musholm resort, accessibility has been thoroughly incorporated, so it is hardly noticeable.
Regardless of their age and disabilities, people are able to participate. Musholm includes a
spectacular, circular sports arena for all kinds of indoor parasports, a restaurant, conference
rooms and houses for rental.

The level-free centre, the wayfinding, the sport activities (especially the cableway), and the
solutions in bathrooms, toilets and rental houses are unique, because a combination of
beautiful design and accessibility has been created for many different kinds of disabilities to
answer the need for highly personalized, custom-made solutions for individuals. The Chair of
the Danish hotel business has described Musholm as an example for the hotel business,
because its increased accessibility increases its competitiveness.

62
Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: In the design process, Musholm
teamed up with numerous experts of various kinds. People with different types of disabilities,
architects who can integrate solutions, and manufacturers of the various types of furniture and
installations were included. This allowed to make the universal design as integrated and
invisible as possible. Today, Musholm has following universal design solutions: a multi-
purpose hall built for wheelchair sports, conferences and concerts, with a special anti-skid
covering due to considerations for those with impaired hearing; sound installations as
directional indicators; a snoezelen room/cinema; an aerial ropeway and climbing wall
accessible for wheelchairs; specially designed toilets for different needs; a fitness area with a
running belt for the walking-impaired; the possibility to control the room's
lock/lighting/heating via mobile phone; wayfinding using colours, pictograms and guidance
elements; 100 m experience ramp to sky lounge; and an accessible bathing jetty.

Changes achieved: Musholm gives people with disabilities a resort where they can visit and
have an active vacation on an equal basis with others. Musholm also challenges stereotypes
about people with disabilities, because people with and without disabilities will meet on an
equal footing. Musholm is also a socio-economic enterprise: when a person visits the site, this
helps promote employment for vulnerable groups. Moreover, all possible profits are
reinvested in Musholm.

How change was monitored and evaluated: Musholm tries to improve the service for all
guests and listens to feedback. This has affected the general design of every room on the
resort.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: Musholm struggles to eliminate prejudices so that people without
disabilities can see the person in the wheelchair and not only the wheelchair. This can be
achieved by creating possibilities of interaction between people.

Other lessons learned: It is possible with a great team and hard work to create an invisible
universal design that allows visitors to meet despite of differences. This also works as a
showroom for other hotels and resorts.

Contact:
Ms. Gitte Fyrkov
gify@musholm.dk
Musholm, Vacation – Sports – Conference
www.musholm.dk

63
Case study 16: Public Plaza: Inclusive Public Spaces (USA)

Name of organization/Government entity: New York City (NYC) Department of

Transportation (DOT)
Project/Programme title: Madison Square Plaza Project

Thematic area of good practice example: Public Space - Plaza Furniture within the
pedestrian right of way

Specific location: Madison Square Public Plaza on East 23rd Street, Manhattan, New York

Duration of project/programme: 1 year

Beneficiaries of good practice example: New Yorkers and NYC visitors with disabilities

Implementing agency/agencies: NYC DOT

Source of funds: New York City DOT Capital Funds

Brief background to the project: NYC DOT works with selected not-for-profit
organizations to create neighbourhood plazas throughout the City to transform underused
streets into vibrant, social public spaces. The NYC Plaza Program is a key part of the City's
effort to ensure that all New Yorkers live within a ten-minute walk of quality open space.

DOT funds the design and construction of plazas and with community input through
public visioning workshops, assists partners in developing a conceptual design appropriate to
the neighbourhood.

After restructuring the street use and building Madison Square plaza, DOT was
approached by PASS (Pedestrians for Accessible and Safe Streets), an advocacy group for
low vision and blind pedestrians in New York City. The team had concerns about the
placement of round planters, granite blocks and detectible warning signs throughout the
plaza.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The main objectives of this project were to
work with special interest groups including PASS and other stakeholders to understand the
complications with the built plazas and identify actionable remedies to those complications.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: DOT, in close interaction with the

NYC Mayor’s Office for People with Disabilities, an accessible design consultant and the
PASS coalition, worked closely to identify areas of the Madison Square plaza that presented
difficulties for pedestrians with disabilities, especially low-vision and/or blind pedestrians.
Together, the group conducted several walkthroughs of the plaza and gathered data on
concrete changes that would transform Madison Square plaza into an accessible space for all
visitors.

Changes achieved: From the data collected, the team was able to clear intersections of all
furniture and added detectible warning signs at the crosswalks to enhance navigation. Granite
blocks were strategically placed to help detect edges of the plaza. Planters and other street

64
furniture were placed closer together to create consistent and clear boundaries within the
plaza and prohibit permeability into active traffic.

How change was monitored and evaluated: DOT’s plaza unit maintained an open dialogue
with the Mayor’s Office for People with Disabilities and the PASS Coalition, who reported
on the positive changes made to Madison Square plaza. The groups meet quarterly to discuss
plazas and other subjects of interests.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: DOT continues its search for sustainable detectible materials that could
be used to easily identify plazas’ boundaries. A lack of national standards and guidelines for
accessibility in outdoor spaces continues to be a struggle.

Other lessons learned: From this project, DOT has learned the importance of actively
seeking the engagement of the disability community. A quarterly meeting with the PASS
Coalition has been established, and DOT also engages other stakeholders from the disability
community for input in its projects. DOT also continues to work in close collaboration with
the Mayor’s Office for People with Disabilities.

Contact:
Quemuel Arroyo |Policy Analyst for Accessibility
NYC Department of Transportation
qarroyo@dot.nyc.gov | 212-839-6426

Victor Calise | Commissioner

NYC Mayor’s Office for People with Disabilities
vcalise@cityhall.nyc.gov | 212-788-2835

65
 Part Four: Strategies and innovations for promoting accessible urban development

Case study 18: Ecuador Lives Inclusion (Ecuador)

Name of organization/Government entity: Technical Secretary for the Inclusive
Management on Disabilities of the Vice-Presidency of the Republic of Ecuador (SETEDIS)

Project/Programme title: Ecuador Lives Inclusion (Ecuador Vive la Inclusión)

Initiative selected as good practice example: Ecuadorian Methodology for Development

Universal Accessibility Plans

Thematic area of good practice example: National and local experience in planning and
building accessible and inclusive cities: infrastructure, housing and public spaces

Specific location: National (24 provinces)

Duration of project/programme: 2013 – ongoing

Beneficiaries of good practice example:

350,000 pregnant women, 1,500,000 children under five years old, 1,229,089 older adults and
374.251 persons with disabilities

Implementing agency/agencies: Technical Secretary for the Inclusive Management on

Disabilities of the Vice-Presidency of the Republic of Ecuador (SETEDIS)

Source of funds: Government of the Republic of Ecuador

Brief background to the project: The Technical Secretariat for the Inclusive Management
on Disabilities was created in 2013 to coordinate the transfer of programmes and projects
from the Misión Solidaria Manuela Espejo to the guiding ministries; following Executive
Directive No. 547, enacted January 14, 2015, it became the Technical Secretariat for the
Inclusive Management on Disabilities.

Its roles include the coordination of cross-sector implementation of public policy in

matters concerning disabilities such as the development and enactment of policy, plans and
programmes to raise awareness about persons with disabilities within the initiative of
Participatory and Productive Inclusion and Universal Access under the national programme
Ecuador Lives Inclusion (Programa Ecuador Vive la Inclusion).

Social inclusion requires a systematic approach in which universal design plays a key
role. The Ecuadorian Government is deploying efforts towards achieving inclusion, hence
SETEDIS is working on the topic of "Universal Accessibility" (UA) as a strategic and
priority project. The project, while having a greater impact on persons with disabilities,
children, pregnant women, and the elderly, also has a positive impact for the entire
population.

During the second semester of 2013, SETEDIS started its activities on UA, and
identified several issues regarding public policies, effectively planning projects, defining

66
priorities and establishing realistic goals, all of which mainly due to a lack of national
information, indicators and methodologies.

This scenario promoted the creation of an innovative methodology to assess and

measure UA, which facilitated developing accessibility plans and prioritizing their
implementation.

Overall objectives of the project/programme:

 Promote the adoption and adaptation of universal accessibility norms.

 Implement accessibility adjustments by building capacity within national and local
governments, civil society and the private sector, and by developing technical tools as
essential factors to bridge and achieve inclusion.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme:

The treatment of persons with disabilities changed radically with the adoption of Ecuador’s
new Constitution in 2008. Since then, work has been carried out to provide persons with
disabilities with equal opportunities and to improve their living conditions. In addition, the
Organic Law on Disability was adopted in 2012, and other national plans and legislation
further promoted and protected their rights.

In terms of legislation, Ecuador has taken its biggest step in advocating for the Rights
of Persons with Disabilities. In practice, however, an effective inclusion of persons with
disabilities required a bridge where national and local governments, civil society, in particular
Disable People Organizations (DPOs), and the private sector could join together in the
implementation of Universal Accessibility.

The first step was the adoption and adaptation of universal accessibility norms. By
2013, the accessibility regulations only covered the physical standards. By late 2013, 16
norms and standards were introduced in Ecuador, including aspects of information,
communication, transportation and technology.

67
 The second step was to address the lack of knowledge about the topic as well as of
qualified professionals, which constitute a major obstacle for the advancement in accessibility
at a national scope. As a response, SETEDIS created a methodology and an index on
accessibility, and built capacity in urban planning and design professionals.

At present, complementary initiatives are being developed, which are based on a

cross-sector implementation strategy of public policy, such as:

 incorporating Universal Accessibility and Universal Design into professional

curricula;
 providing technical assistance to Decentralized Autonomous Governments on the
design and adoption of Ordinances;
 incorporating a chapter on Universal Accessibility into the Ecuadorian Building
Standard (NEC), mandatory regulations for the building industry;
 creating an Accessibility recognition seal;
 applying accessibility principles in the e-government project law.

Changes achieved:

The general results reveal a worrying actual scenario in matters of inclusion; also, it is proved
that the methodology can be applied in further studies of universal design with minimum
adaptations.
Some of the main achievements are:

Universal access is an issue that cuts across disabilities and sectors, and therefore, constitutes
the very basis of empowerment of people with disabilities. The Ecuadorian Universal
Accessibility strategy is in line with Participative Inclusion, which has developed 140
intersectorial networks of territorial coordination.

68
140 500
Public and Private
Intersectoral
Institutions are
Networks of
Part of the
Territorial
Network
Coordination

90 64.000
Persons
Circuits count with participated in
a strategy of the process
Inclusive
Community
Development

69
How change was monitored and evaluated: The application of the methodology allowed to
gather national data on universal accessibility. It constitutes the baseline for upcoming
evaluations in the implementation of universal adjustment.

The methodology includes an index and three core indicators: safety, autonomy and comfort.
During 2014, the methodology with its index was tested and validated in two studies, a study
of 149 public schools and an analysis of accessibility in three provinces of Ecuador. Both
studies were carried out in a participatory process that took into account users' experiences
and opinions.

A Principal Components Analysis (PCA) was applied to obtain values and vectors of the
sampling covariance matrix, which resulted from the main data matrix. PCA determines the
Ecuadorian accessibility index as follows:

GENERAL
ACCESSIBILITY LEVEL
47%
IN ECUADOR
LOW

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: As a result of the methodology and the studies, resources should be
prioritized to make accessibility adjustments in public schools by the Ministry of Education;
governmental free service should be created for assessing public and private entities on
developing and implementing their own “accessibility plans”, among others.

70
The main challenge identified is “the mirage of the wheelchair ramp”, universal accessibility
is often reduced to describing facilities or amenities to assist people with impaired mobility.
The implementation of accessibility adjustments and their proper maintenance requires the
development of an accessibility management system by the Decentralized Autonomous
Governments and the political decision to mobilize adequate funds.

Contact:
Ms. Maria Daniela Navas Perrone
Technical Secretary for the Inclusive Management on Disabilities, Vice-Presidency of the
Republic of Ecuador (SETEDIS)
Email: santiago.santos@setedis.gob.ec

71
Case study 19: Supporting architects and urban planners to understand accessibility (The
Global Alliance on Accessible Technologies and Environments, GAATES)

Name of organization/Government entity: The Global Alliance on Accessible

Technologies and Environments (GAATES)
Project/Programme title: GAATES: Supporting architects and urban planners to understand
accessibility

Thematic area of good practice example: Urban planning, engineering, architecture –

helping design professionals to understand their obligations under Accessibility for Ontarians
with Disabilities Act (AODA), Integrated Accessibility Standard (IAS), and specifically, the
section on the Design of Public Spaces.

Specific location: Ontario, Canada

Duration of project/programme: The course is ongoing, and once registered, individuals

can learn and take the quizzes at their own pace, whenever it is convenient for them. The
course is designed to meet the continuing education needs of architects, landscape architects
and urban planners, but is open to anyone interested in or working in relation to the
accessible design and implementation of public spaces.

Beneficiaries of good practice example: The beneficiaries include all persons of society, but
especially persons with disabilities, who will benefit from more accessible and inclusive
accessible public spaces.
Implementing agency/agencies: GAATES offers this course in association with the
following project partners: Ontario Association of Architects, Ontario Association of
Landscape Architects, Association of Registered Interior Designers of Ontario, Ontario
Professional Planners Institute, Association of Architectural Technologists of Ontario, and
Ontario Association of Certified Engineering Technicians and Technologists.
Source of funds: The development of the Illustrated Technical Guide and the online course
were originally funded by the Government of Ontario as part of the Enabling Change
programme. The operation of the online course and programme is now self-sustaining.

Brief background to the project: In 2005, the Government of Ontario, Canada passed the
Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, which aims at improving accessibility
standards for Ontarians with physical and mental disabilities. This statute was complex and
its content largely unknown to small businesses and in particular to architects, landscape
architects, urban planners, engineers and other design professionals.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The aim of this project is to support

architects, urban planners, and engineers as well as small businesses to help them understand
their obligations under the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) and to
support them in the implementation process. The GAATES project team, which consists of
people with various disabilities, developed a set of publications, a technology vendor
database, and learning and reference resources – all written in plain language and accessible
online.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme:

To address the lack of understanding of the new legislation, the project staff have developed a
number of publications, an information and communication technology vendor database, as

72
well as learning and reference resources consisting of an online course and an illustrated
technical guide. The publications, which are all available in accessible formats, make clear
the obligations under the new law. They also show small businesses how to: (i) provide
information to their clients in formats that are accessible to everyone; and (ii) communicate
with their clients in an inclusive manner. The vendor database gives businesses the
opportunity to search for expertise within specific areas regulated by the AODA. For
example, if a business looks for a sign language interpreter or a company to create accessible
documents, it can use these terms as search criteria, and the database will provide contact
information for vendors who can provide the services. The online course, which costs 100
Canadian dollars (approx. US$72), focuses on the AODA Accessibility Standard for the
Design of Public Spaces (AODA DOPS) and provides an overview of the obligations of
businesses to comply with the AODA-DOPS and the technical requirements of the
legislation. The course was developed on a fully accessible learning platform. The various
resources and the online course have been developed under the guidance of a steering
committee, which represents various professional associations of Ontario and includes
persons with disabilities.

Changes achieved:
The various project publications have been downloaded more than 8,250 times.
The ICT vendor database has been accessed about 150 times per month, over 5,000 times to
date.
Since the launch of the website, over 175 design professionals have subscribed to it.

How change was monitored and evaluated: The Government of Ontario is responsible for
the monitoring of the implementation of the accessible public spaces since they are designed
and built as part of ongoing development projects across the province. GAATES continues to
provide the ongoing programme support.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: The platform on which the course is hosted can be a challenge for
navigation for course takers because it is not as intuitive as it could have been.

Other lessons learned: GAATES will continue to offer the various publications free-of-
charge through the GAATES website, as well as the for-fee online course. The lessons
learned in creating fully accessible publications and a fully accessible online course will be
transferred to other GAATES projects.

The Accessibility Standard for the Design of Public Spaces: A GAATES Online
Learning Course: http://gaates.org/the-accessibility-standard-for-the-design-of-public-
spaces-gaates-online-learning-course/
The Illustrated Technical Guide to the Accessibility Standard for the Design of Public
Spaces
Download the Illustrated Guide (PDF format, 75.6 MB) Download PDFORView the
Illustrated Guide on the Web
Contact:
Ms. Marnie Peters
GAATES
Ottawa, CANADA
+1 613 725 0566
gaates.marnie.peters@gmail.com

73
Case study 20: Accessibility, Civic Consciousness, Employment and Social Support for
People with Disabilities (Uzbekistan)

Thematic area of the best practice example: promotion of accessibility

Specific location: Uzbekistan: Samarkand, Shakhrizabz and Tashkent

Duration of the project: September 2008 – April 2011

Beneficiaries of the good practice: People with disabilities, the State Committee on
Architecture and Construction, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, local government
authorities and DPOs.

Implementing agency/agencies: UNDP with Ministry of Labour and Social Security

Source of funds: Target for Resource Assignments from the Core (TRAC)/UNDP, UNICEF
Uzbekistan

Brief background to the project /programme: Among the Commonwealth of Independent

States (CIS), Uzbekistan was one of the first to focus on the problem of disability and the first
to pass the Law “On Social Protection of the Disabled”, on 18 November 1991, which served
as an example for the development of similar laws in other CIS Republics. In July 2008, the
Government approved the new version of this law, which includes a detailed description of
mechanisms for ensuring the equal rights of persons with disabilities and increases
accountability for breaching the law. The new version of the law conforms to the norms and
principles of the CRPD, which was signed by Uzbekistan on 27 February 2009. Moreover, in
2002, Uzbekistan developed State Rules and Standards on the Provision of Accessibility for
People with Disabilities. Nevertheless, because of physical barriers, access to services and
participation in socio-political life were often impossible for people with physical disabilities.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The overall goal of the project was to widen
social inclusion of people with disabilities by increasing public awareness and breaking
stigma, improving mechanisms of implementation of national legislation on disability issues,
promoting accessibility, and creating a system of social support in the employment of people
with disabilities. The specific objectives were to develop by-laws for the enforcement of
existing legislation, enhance the capacity of responsible agencies and establish effective
monitoring of accessibility systems, as well as to raise awareness of accessibility norms
among specialists and the general population.

Process/strategy used to implement the project/programme:

The following activities were undertaken:

 a public awareness-raising campaign to promote a rights-based approach to

accessibility, which included the dissemination of posters in social agencies and
educational institutions, the placing of banners on streets, and the conducting of TV
and radio talk shows, TV broadcasts of social animated films and short
documentaries;

74
  selection by local authorities of 30 pilot public buildings (schools, colleges, hospitals,
drugstores, employment services, etc.) in Tashkent, Samarkand and Shakhrisabz to
provide full accessibility for people with physical impairments;

 a training programme, including disability equality training, for specialists from the
State;

 the Committee on Architecture and Construction and its regional branches (people
with disabilities were co-trainers);

 monitoring of accessibility of public buildings (over 2,800 of them) with the

participation of wheelchair users;

 support to the development of by-laws related to accessibility issues in the framework

of the enforcement of the law on social protection of persons with disabilities in
Uzbekistan;

 distribution of 3,000 toolkits on the provision of accessibility among specialists and

DPOs.

Changes achieved:
The project has achieved results in the following areas:

Legislation and policies: The Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers, “On measures of
imposing fines to organizations for violation of the legislation on social protection of persons
with disabilities”, was adopted on 5 January 2011. It establishes the mechanisms for
monitoring accessibility and gives authority to inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and
Social Security to impose fines for breaking accessibility standards.

Capacity-building: 143 specialists from the State Committee on Architecture and

Construction and its regional branches improved their knowledge and skills on the provision
of accessibility.

Accessibility: As a result of monitoring, Accessibility City Guides to Tashkent and

Samarkand were developed and published in 2011, which target persons with physical
impairments. Also, 28 out of 30 pilot public buildings are now fully accessible for wheelchair
users; more than 70 per cent of newly constructed buildings in Samarkand and Shakhrisabz
are also accessible.

Shortcomings or persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: There are no national standards on accessibility and of information on
accessibility in general for persons with different types of impairments, which narrowed the
focus of the interventions.

It would have been useful to start developing national accessibility standards, based on
international experience, for persons with different types of impairments. Standards of
accessibility of information could have been introduced.

Other lessons learned: The raising of awareness on disability issues of specialists working
in government agencies led to a sharp increase in the number of newly constructed,

75
accessible buildings. Presentations made by persons with disabilities on the impact of
physical barriers on their lives helped change people’s understanding of the issue.

76
Contact:
Dr Yana Chicherina, “Inclusive Employment and Social Partnership” Project Manager.
Skype:
yana_chicherina; e-mail: yana.chicherina@undpaffiliates.org.
Ms. Aziza Umarova, Head of Good Governance Unit, UNDP Uzbekistan.
E-mail: Aziza.Umarova@undp.org; tel.: +998 71 1203459/64.

77
Case study 21: League of Accessible and Historical Cities (Italy, Denmark, France, Spain,
Bulgaria)

Name of organization/Government entity: European Foundation Centre

Initiative selected as good practice example: League of Accessible and Historical Cities
(LHAC)

Thematic area of good practice example: Accessibility in Historical Cities

Specific location: Italy, Denmark, France, Spain, Bulgaria

Duration of project/programme: 2010-2015

Beneficiaries of good practice example: The project benefits all people with disabilities,
especially tourists travelling with their families and friends. It goes even further by
benefitting all people living in these historical cities, as well as people with a temporary
disability, the elderly people, parents with strollers, among others.

Implementing agency/agencies: European Foundation Centre – coordinating organization

City/country implementing organization:

Avila (Spain) – Fundación ONCE;
Lucca (Italy) – Fondazione Banca Monte di Lucca;
Mulhouse (France) – Fondation Réunica, Fondation de France, Centre Français des Fonds et
Fondations;
Torino (Italy) – Fondazione CRT;
Viborg (Denmark) – Realdania Foundation, Bevica Foundation, The Danish Disability
Foundation and The Labour Market Holiday Fund;
Sozopol (Bulgaria) – Sozopol Foundation

Source of funds: The financing of the project comes from six foundations, which invested
over EUR 7 million in total in the six historical cities where the project has been
implemented.

Brief background to the project: The project aims at allowing all people with disabilities
and others to fully enjoy leisure and cultural activities, and at stimulating tourism among the
80 million people with disabilities living in Europe. From this point of view, the project is
therefore expected to contribute to the cities´ long-term cultural and social development.
Improved access to a city’s cultural heritage makes it more dynamic and attractive to its
residents and tourists, and thereby increases its economic profit

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The League of Accessible and Historical

Cities (LHAC) project is implemented in six cities with the aim of improving the accessibility
of historical towns in Europe for all. Being a replicable model, it promotes the development
of responsible tourism and the protection of historical heritage at a larger scale.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: The project is based on a common

methodology and framework provided by a technical accessibility consultancy. In addition,
each city had to face its own specificities, legislations, partners and finances. All of these

78
characteristics led to different approaches adopted by each Foundation leading in each city
and to a method, which greatly enriched the project and facilitated mutual learning.

The common element revolves the idea of fully accessible routes that were implemented in
each city. The routes include parks, restaurants, shops, tourist information centres and link
some of the outstanding heritage sites, museums, buildings and other features of the cities by
means of a continuous, signposted, pedestrian pathway provided with interpretive
information about the places which are encountered on the route. Although creating an
accessible route is to be considered as a goal in itself, it represents only a part of a larger
process to ensure a wider accessible urban environment. The LHAC is based on a philosophy
that embraces the strength of mutual learning as a way to overcome difficulties.

The network acts as a hub for good practice exchange among the foundations and the
cities involved. The project therefore focuses not only on the development of innovative
solutions, but also on the creation of new forms of interactions to tackle a complex social
issue such as the equal and full participation of people with disabilities in society. As a result,
a European network has been created, which goes beyond the mere sharing of information by
acting jointly with several European countries.

Changes achieved: The LHAC serves as example for other cities willing to improve
accessibility. A best practice guide has been published as a tool for actors and stakeholders in
other historical cities – including foundations, public authorities, chambers of commerce,
tourist destination managers, heritage associations, disability organizations and others – who
are interested in exploring and examining the possibility of establishing similar accessible
routes.

How change was monitored and evaluated: Extensive evaluation is available at:
www.lhac.eu/resources/toolip/doc/2015/07/23/evaluation-last-version-excel.pdf

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: The main obstacle is still the lack of a common European regulatory
framework that defines accessibility standards.

Other lessons learned: An important result of this project is that this collaboration sparked
another project that has been founded by the European Commission: Three foundations have
been collaborating with other organizations (mainly local and regional autorities and travel
agencies) to develop the STRING PROJECT (Smart Tourist Routes for Inclusive Groups
(http://www.stringbox.eu/en/). However, there is the possibility based on the foundations’
interest to start new collaborations based on this model and to strongly tackle other issues that
will complement the itineraries (e.g. accessibility in museums).

Contact:

Balmas Silvia
sbalmas@efc.be

European Foundation Centre,

Belgium
www.efc.be

79
80
Case study 22: Aha! (Accessibility Help & Advice), Mapathon of accessible places and
inclusive customer service workshops (Canada)

Name of organization/Government entity: Inclusive Design Research Centre, OCAD

University and AXS Map

Thematic area of good practice example: Wayfinding, Education and Awareness,

Community and Youth Engagement, Crowdsourcing

Specific location: Multiple locations globally, see www.axsmap.com

Duration of project/programme: Ongoing since 2012

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Persons with disabilities, businesses, public

venues, youth, community members, tourists and travellers

Implementing agency/agencies: Inclusive Design Research Centre, AXS Map, school

boards, community organizations

Source of funds: The Government of Ontario

Brief background to the project: A first step to creating accessible urban spaces is general
awareness of accessibility principles and an understanding of the benefits of inclusive design
within a community. Aha! provides training and resources to businesses on how to become
accessible. A primary outreach technique is mapathons that use the AXS Map application.

AXS Map is a web and mobile mapping database that invites community members to share
reviews on the accessibility of businesses and places. The database is populated in part
through community events called Mapathons, in which teams canvas neighbourhoods to
identify the accessibility of all businesses and public spaces. The Aha! mapathons are often
used as experiential learning for school children.

The Mapathon community events spark a culture shift within a community, maps out
accessible businesses and venues for persons with disabilities, provides incentives for
businesses that make accessibility improvements, educates business owners and encourages
continuous improvement on the part of property owners and managers.

Overall objectives of the project/programme:

1. To provide persons with disabilities with information about the accessibility of

businesses and other public spaces.

2. To educate business owners and property owners regarding strategies and benefits of
inclusion.

3. To provide incentives for continuous improvement of accessibility within a

community.

4. To raise awareness of accessibility among school children, thereby encouraging a

culture shift.

81
 5. To connect communities globally in the collective effort of inclusive design of urban
spaces.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: The Aha! project was

implemented by a diverse team of students who organized mapathons throughout Ontario,
Canada. The team used the mapathon opportunity to educate participants about accessibility
and inclusion and to engage business owners in discussions and workshops on accessibility.
Materials for workshops were developed by stakeholders.

Changes achieved: Aha! has created the most successful mapathon, and AXS Map has over
100,000 businesses mapped around the globe.

How change was monitored and evaluated: Usage metrics gathered on the AXS Maps site,
as well as qualitative and anecdotal data gathered during Mapathons and aha! workshops are
being used to monitor and evaluate outcomes.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: While the programme addresses the accessibility of businesses and
public spaces, the accessibility of the urban infrastructure (sidewalks, roads, etc.) can
continue to cause barriers to access. The aha! mapathons reveal that there are many
misconceptions about accessibility and persons with disabilities. There appears to be a
common resistance to accessibility compliance even if there are building codes and laws
related to accessibility.

Other lessons learned: School children are ideal ambassadors for inclusive design. In
talking to businesses they are persuasive and disarming educators and see accessibility as a
non-optional common goal. Engaging the larger community in reviewing accessibility creates
community investment in the effort. Linking communities globally in a common map and
database elicits community pride. Small business owners are more responsive to training at
their premises.

Contact:
Inclusive Design Research Centre, OCAD University, info@idrc.ocadu.ca
Prof. Jutta Treviranus, Director, jtreviranus@ocadu.ca
Dr. David Pereyra, aha! Project Coordinator, dpereyra@ocadu.ca

82
Case study 23: The Forum “One Quarter for All” (Germany)

Name of organization/Government entity: Civil Society Initiative “Q8: Eine Mitte für Alle
”

Thematic area of good practice example: Inclusive Urban Development

Specific location: Hamburg-Altona, Germany

Duration of project/programme: 2012 - open-ended

Beneficiaries of good practice example: Future accommodation/facility users

Implementing agency/agencies: Civic initiative started by “Q8”, an activity of

“Evangelische Stiftung Alsterdorf”

Brief background to the project: The newly developing quarter Mitte Altona is Hamburg’s
second-largest urban project and comprises 3,500 flats in a central location. In 2012, when
the plans gained more public attention, the Forum decided to pursue an ambitious goal: to
develop this project as the first inclusive quarter in Hamburg.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: How to develop a quarter in which everyone

is an inclusive participant? How to mould the quarter’s conditions in such a way that all
persons are part of local life and obtain the support they require? How to include all-
encompassing accessibility as a planning criterion for the new quarter?
With these questions the civic initiative started the project in order to elaborate responses and
solve possible problems before they occur.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: With the support of the Q8

initiative participants from the community, politics, administration, religious communities,
associations, foundations, local initiatives and joint building ventures established the Forum,
One Quarter for All. It developed 30 goals and associated recommendations for inclusive
architectural and urban development. The functioning of the Forum and its working results

83
reflect a systematic and exemplary combination of a bottom-up process with the aims of the
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Changes achieved: The informal, highly efficient project One Quarter for All triggers a new
approach for politics and administration in Hamburg in favour of social inclusion in urban
development. The project has shown a demonstrable effect: politics and administration have
adopted the initiative’s postulations. One Quarter for All is recommend in the current
Hamburg state government programme to be employed in the future as best practice for all
larger development projects in the city state.

How change was monitored and evaluated: The Forum significantly contributed to the
achievement that inclusion has been made an important component of the city’s development
contract with the investors within the Mitte Altona project.

In 2013, One Quarter for All was bestowed the Senator-Neumann Award for “outstanding
and innovative projects promoting an inclusive society”. Within the framework of the zero
project conference on the issue of political participation and self-determined life in 2015, the
Forum was selected as one of the 30 ‘innovative practices’.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: One Quarter for All is breaking new ground in the rarely explored field
of inclusive urban development. In this areas it encounters topics that require new approaches
from the ground up to be further engineered together with all stakeholders involved in the
quarter’s development.

Other lessons learned: Comprehensive, circumspect and constructive collaboration with

citizens, politics, local institutions, economy and administration is of paramount importance
for success in the creation of a really inclusive quarter.

Contact:
Forum Eine Mitte für Alle
Mail: c/o Q8, Ms Agathe Bogacz
Max-Brauer-Allee 50, 22765 Hamburg
+ 49 40 35748153
a.bogacz@q-acht.net
www.q-acht.net/eine-mitte-fuer-alle.html

84
Case study 24: Help me help you: accessibility of public services (Israel)

Name of organization/Government entity: Access Israel

Thematic area of good practice example: Accessibility of public services

Specific location: Israel

Duration of project/programme: 2010-2016

Beneficiaries of good practice example: The programme promotes better service for
residents with all kinds of disabilities, by exposing municipality personnel to the world of
persons with disabilities, including accessibility arrangements within the organization, in
order to provide equal and accessible services.

Implementing agency/agencies: Access Israel’s Accessibility Training Department

Source of funds: The Project is funded partially by the Municipality (25%) and the rest
(75%) subsidized by the Ministry of Welfare and/or Philip Morris Corp.

Brief background to the project: Under Israeli regulation, every municipality is required to
provide its staff with accessible service training, in which they are educated about disabled
people in general, and gain knowledge and practical skills in accessible service. However,
local authorities in Israel do not have the financial resources and the knowhow to do this.

Overall objectives of the project/programme: The Programme provides the municipality

service providers with tools on how to assist people with disabilities and offer accessible
service, allowing persons with disabilities to receive the service offered by the municipality
with dignity, equality and independence. The advantage of the Project is its immediate effect
on the quality of accessible service granted in the municipality.

Process/strategy to implement the project/programme: Access Israel developed a unique

model for training towards accessible service. This includes a preparatory session, a tour of
the accessibility in municipality’s jurisdiction and a survey of accessibility-related complaints
within the authority. These activities are followed by a one-day seminar in which participants
meet people with various disabilities, learn about the authority's accessibility resources and
acquire tools necessary to perform various services. Participants then experience and feel
what it is like to "walk in a disabled person's shoes" in a participatory way, following an
interactive lecture about specific local adaptations, simulations of accessible service,
performed by instructors with disabilities, whereby service providers are given immediate
and practical tools to provide accessible services.

This unique project succeeds, at a low cost, in equipping service providers with professional
tools tailored to their specific local authority, which have shown immediate improvement of
quality of service. This is a stigma-breaking programme, generating dialogue between
residents with disabilities and service providers in the authority. Having persons with
disabilities as instructors helps create a positive perception and understanding of the
capability of persons with disabilities, promoting equal and respectful integration.

85
Changes achieved: The project proved highly successful in local authorities who had
adopted the programme and provided the workshop. Feedback from these local authorities
show that staff views of persons with disabilities have shifted, and new accessibility protocols
and arrangements were developed and put in place for residents with disabilities. Having
exposed workers to the value of inclusion, the project has opened the door to other inclusive
ventures.

How change was monitored and evaluated: Participants fill out a simple survey on the
project. Access Israel keeps in touch with the municipalities and is able to follow-up on the
positive effects of the programme. Several municipalities were satisfied with it and requested
additional workshops.

Shortcomings and persistent challenges identified in the implementation of the

project/programme: Many municipalities showed reluctance at first in enabling the initial
meeting and survey of the municipality with a focus on disabilities, afraid to open a
Pandora’s box of complaints and have to deal with stigmas. In addition, regardless of the
success of those who participated, only 45 municipalities have participated from more than
300 municipalities in Israel - funding and prejudice prove to be the biggest obstacles.

Other lessons learned: Breaking the Glass Ceiling is not a cliché; it is reality. This project
reflects a shift in views among service providers in all areas of service within the local
authority, improving service to disabled people as well as to the entire population. In local
authorities where the project was implemented, disabled people have been greatly
empowered when integrated as instructors, leading rather than being led.

The project has created a real buzz and became popular because of the extremely positive
reactions received by those who have participated in these programmes. The budget is being
reduced by including more local persons with disabilities in the programme.

Contact:
Mr. Or Cohen
Access Israel
Or@aisrael.o

86
Final words:Promoting accessibility as a public good, building sustainable and inclusive
urban development for all

“The most difficult barrier to overcome is the human attitude.

Attitude of human being make the world inaccessible… Change the
discriminatory mentality toward a culture of inclusion and
accessibility is imperative for an agenda of true urban
development.”

Lenin Moreno, Special Envoy on Disability and Accessibility

(Ecuador), message delivered at the Forum on Disability Inclusion
and Accessible Urban Development, Nairobi, 28 October 2015.

After more than 30 years of normative guidance on the central role of accessibility of the
general systems of society in promoting equalization of opportunities for persons with
disabilities,21 the question arises as to why accessibility in the built environment, in transport
and public accommodations and in information and communication technology is not yet the
“new normal”. Rather, environmental accessibility is most often – but not always – a product
of regulation, administrative guidance or judicial actions.

Accessibility following the principles of universal design refers to solutions that are intuitive
to use, require little effort and respond to needs, interests and capabilities of a wide-range of
end users, equally – persons with disabilities and non-disabled persons alike. Accessibility
solutions are efficient in that one set of designs or procedures are produced to respond to a
wide-range of expected end-user needs, interests and capabilities; they generally involve end-
user input on performance requirements and build on feedback on actual usage from diverse
communities of interest. Accessibility solutions are cost-effective in that designs generally do
not require costly retrofitting to respond to new accessibility requirements; end-user feedback
contributes to solutions that deliver enhanced accessibility and usability as required.

Accessibility solutions built upon basic concepts and principles of universal design may not
always reflect a strict universal design construct. This distinction can be seen by recalling the
basic concepts of universal design:
(a) Equitable use: the design is useful and relevant to a wide group of end-users;
(b) Flexibility in use: the design accommodates a wide range of individual
preferences and abilities;
(c) Simple and intuitive use: the design is easy to understand regardless of the
knowledge, experience, language skills or concentration level of the end-user;
(d) Perceptive information: the design communicates information effectively to
the user regardless of the ambient condition or the sensory abilities of the end-
user;
(e) Tolerance for error: the design minimizes the hazards and adverse
consequences of unintended actions by the end-user;


Special appreciation goes to Mr. Clinton E. Rapley, Director of Planning Services, Associates for International
Management who shared inputs at the DESA-UN Habitat Forum on Disability Inclusion and Accessible Urban
Development, Nairobi, 28 October 2015.
21
World Programme of Action concerning Disabled Persons, United Nations General Assembly Resolution,
(A/37/351/Add.1 andAdd.1/Corr.1, Annex).

87
 (f) Low physical effort: the design can be used easily, efficiently and comfortably
with a minimum of fatigue;
(g) Size and space: the size and space for approach, reach, manipulation and use
should be appropriate regardless of the body size, posture or mobility of the
end-user.22

While universal designs provide intuitive ease of use and allow for end-user error, they do not
specifically and fully address the provision of accessibility for a diverse range of end-users as
set forth in Article 9 (Accessibility) of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities.23

This publication aims to illustrate good practices and present options for promoting
environmental accessibility in the context of urban development. It is premised on the notion
that environmental accessibility is a member of the set of global public goods and not a
defined benefit for specific members of the population. Once provided, no one person can be
excluded from accessible environments. The benefit that any one end-user can experience
from accessible environments, urban infrastructure or information and communication
technology does not diminish opportunities for others to enjoy the “ease and flexibility” of
accessible environments.

Addressing environmental accessibility as an issue in the provision of a global public good in

the context of development would move budget debates from questions as to how to, and who
should fund disability-specific and accessible infrastructure and services, on to decisions
about maximizing public welfare and levels of living within available resources for urban
development.

It is possible to cite a number of examples of accessibility that are good practices in daily life,
from small appliances, to larger and essential technologies and public infrastructure. A
number of factors have been identified with the increase in the production of accessible
designs: the gaining of a market share among under-served populations; pre-emptive
responses to forthcoming regulatory actions; the growing use of mobile access to information
and communication technologies, which requires efficient and usable designs with increasing
accessibility to capture and retain an extensive range of end-users; and population ageing,
which has been accelerating globally.

An everyday example of accessibility can be found in digital rice cookers produced by the
Toshiba Corporation: the user interface is in English and also in braille. The devices are on
offer at Toshiba dealers and do not involve an extra visit to service organization for the
visually impaired, since the Braille option is a given, not an extra charge.

The example of the above approach needs to be scaled up for many more small appliances.
To achieve this, appliance producers need to think of opportunities of meeting under-served
consumers with accessible interface options.

In the field of technology, a major development is the decision by Internet browser software
publishers to include – at no charge – the option to increase the size of content displayed.
Previously, such a capacity was an extra-charge item for end-users who were unable to work

22
Report. International Seminar on Environmental Accessibility, Beirut, 30 November - 3 December 1999 (United Nations
document: E/ESCWA/HS/2000/1), p. 4.
23
General Assembly Resolution 61/106, annex.

88
with a conventional display. Experience suggests, however, that accessible information and
communication technology is always ‘under construction’: the rapid pace of developments in
Internet-enabled services and content can often present challenges to end-users who may
have sensory, physical or intellectual impairments. Often, regulatory or administrative
guidance is required to ensure content developers and service providers respond to recognised
standards for accessible information and communication goods and services, many of which
have been developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).24

Experience also suggests that designs providing accessible environments and facilities require
both post-occupancy surveys to ensure that standards employed respond to actual end-user
needs, and periodic monitoring in the light of changing technologies, end-user characteristics
or service expansion. There are many examples that illustrate the cost-implications for post-
construction as shown in two examples below. The first is of the United Nations House in
Beirut, which houses both the United Nations Regional Economic and Social Commission for
Western Asia and a number of United Nations system representative offices. The house was
constructed in the late-20th century, together with the redevelopment of the Beirut Central
Business District, as an accessible facility. However, post-occupancy surveys found areas,
particularly for ease of entry and exit, where applicable standards did not produce accessible
solutions for local users; retrofits were budgeted and implemented to meet actual end-user
accessibility needs.

The second example is of the late-20th century urban infrastructure related to the Skytrain
system of Bangkok, Thailand. At the time of design and construction, developers provided
only limited access to Skytrain stations by lift; passengers with mobility issues and parents
with children in strollers were at a severe disadvantage in using this quick and efficient
transport system. Interested civil society organizations soon took the case of unequal access
to the court system and recently won a judgment that Skytrain must provide ease of access at
all current and planned stations, which is currently being undertaken at considerable costs. At
the initial design stage, developers argued that the available budget did not allow for
provision of lifts at all stations; a decision was made to provide lifts at a limited set of
stations, mainly with high-levels of tourist traffic. In essence, the Skytrain management at the
time applied a classic corner solution to facility use and access rather than construct an
appropriate welfare function that would maximize benefits for a wide range of potential end-
users.

The above examples, and indeed the case studies illustrated in this publication, demonstrate
that accessibility is and shall be regarded and promoted proactively as a public good and a
framework for efficient solutions in the context of inclusive and sustainable urban
development.

24
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is an international community that develops open standards to ensure the long-
term growth of the web: www.w3.org.

89